This fight sometimes happens in Siberia where both the Siberian tiger and the brown bear live. Tigers have been know to attack and kill female and young brown bears. However, the tigers have learned to avoid the boars. A male grizzly could easily overpower the biggest tiger. The American grizzly is simply a sub-species of brown bear.

Dude. Bear over Tiger like Anna's over Boca Grande. No Comparison. Where's my Pants?

Seeing the bear is a grizzly and not a Russian bear I'd give the upper hand to the tiger but if it was a Russian bear the tiger would be the usual loser.

you may of seen my post on cougar vs black bear i work with big cats espechaly cougars. but iv worked with tigers as well as all the other cats and tigers are verry deadly but the grizzly strenghth gives it the atvantig. a lion truely has a better chance killing a grizzly then a tiger. a tiger can kill one iff the sneek up behind and jump on there back but iff the bear knows hes there the tiger has his hands full cuz bears are also exstremly fast. tiger vs grizzly grizzly wins 60 out of 100 times. i ones did witness a fight when i had to remove a siberian tiger from a small town. he was geting to close. i was waching a grizzly feeding and the tiger jumped on his back and killed it instantly.

Brady, 
 
 
 
How can you say the Lion would have the better chance than the Tiger of killing the Grizzly? First, Tiger's kill Russian Browns by stealth. Second, are we including Male Kodiaks, Coastal Alaskan Brown/Grizzlies that weigh between 700-1400 Lbs. or just inland Grizzlies? 
 
 
 
I'll go with the Big Bears! 
 
 
 
Big Male Bears 70 
 
 
 
Big Male Tigers 30 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Big Male Bears 90 
 
 
 
Big Male Lions 10 
 
 
 
We have been arguing this issue on the Lion Black Bear site! 
 
 
 

dont underestamate the lion yes the tiger kills brown bears with stelth but the lion will cercal the bear just like it dose to every other invading preditor and when i was working with some guys who were on a lion show on anilmale planet they had proved that in a fight between a lion and a grizzly the lion would win 70 out of 100 times. the tiger also has a hard time killing a male lion cuz a male lion only knows how to fight cuz they grow up fighting all there life to get ready to fight for a pride and tiger cant get a hold of there neck esaly cuz of there long mane. u can belive what u want but ill stick with what iv lerned working with big cats

well i think this fight is 50 50 iff the tiger gets the jump he wins iff the bear gets the jump or the fight is in close corders the bear wins but all the bear has to do is bring his middy arme down on the tigers back and its over but the tigers to slipry so i think this fight can go ether way there both devastating animals

the bear would win due to size strength and because it's skull is thicker. any blow the tiger receives to its head could be fatal. on another note they used to have real animal fights in the early 1900's and the bear was banned due to the fact it kept winning.

lion vs grizzly - 20/100 for the lion, the biggest predators lions are use to fighting are hyenas aside from other lions. 
 
tiger vs grizzly - 50/50 for head on matches. Black/sloth bear are bigger than hyenas and some black bears can even reach the size of afriacn lions (though rare) and the tiger still wins. 
 
tiger vs russian bear - 30/100 for the tiger on head on matches. 
 
lion vs russian bear - 9/100 for the lion.

the exspersts at animal face-off belive that the lion would beat the tiger tiger would loss to the grizzly and lion would beat the grizzly

the polar bear or all bears would beat a tiger.

All bears is wrong for in India tigers prey on adult sloth bears and black bears as well as they eat Russian bears in Siberia, so what do you mean by all bears? 
 
Of course a Polar bear or a larger species of brown bear thats larger than the grizzle can kill any big cat but thats not all bears.

alright look, the animal face off was not between a lion and an indian tiger, it was some other tiger, an indian tiger would certainly beat any lion. and some bears would lose to a tiger or lion. but a grizzly kodiak or polar bear would easily dominate any of these big cats

I am an African and favors the lion but the fact about lions is that, the lion is skill limited on fighting other animals. The lion is too agressive and shows off its power and does not have fighting strategy instead it has got killing strategy mainly in South and North Africa Eastern and Western Parts would be a problem for a lion where you would find Tigers 
 
 
 
I saw a video whereby the joker mistakenly open the cage and the tiger got passed him and went straight for the male lion 
 
 
 
They fought for almost 20minutes and the tiger was skillfull rolling down all sides and the lion could only be agrasive but was not skillful like the tiger 
 
 
 
At the end the tiger could not jump on top of the tiger nor the lion could get a nice grip off the tiger but the lion was killed after it was tired and the tiger won the fight easy because of its tactics and strategy 
 
 
 
On the other hand people underestimate the power and the skill of the lioness, lioness are prey killers in the family whereby lions joins after the kill has neen made 
 
 
 
Again i watched a video between the lioness and the male tiger the two could not finish the fight but the lioness had opportunities to kill the male tiger but ended up avoiding each other simply because the lioness applied the skills and avoided being beaten on vulnerable areas 
 
 
 
Regards,

My friend there are records of tigress beating male lions as well. yeah and I know people truely overate male lions when it is the lioness that really deserves the praises but I think mostly its because she is maneless. 
 
 
 
And for all those people who believe animal face off I think than you need to get your own information on each animal before you agree with animal face off because unless that grizzly bear was young, or ill or not very healthy there is no way a male lion can be the usual victor.

From my experience, it's like this. 
 
 
 
Siberian Tiger vs lion: 10/10 - for the tiger. 
 
 
 
Bengal Tiger vs lion: 8/10 - tiger. 
 
 
 
Average sized Grizzly bear vs Average sized Polar bear: 5/10 - the grizzly. 
 
 
 
Exceptionally large grizzly (kodiak bear) vs large polar bear: 9/10 - for the grizzly 
 
 
 
Lion vs average grizzly/polar bear: 9/10- for the grizzly/polar bear. 
 
 
 
Average size grizzly/polar bear vs Bengal tiger: 7/10-for the bear 
 
 
 
Average size grizzly/polar bear vs Siberian Tiger: 5/10 for the bear

dannyp206 
 
 
 
You seem to to think that lions and bears are push over and will just sit still and be killed. I do agree that lion vs tiger the tiger would be the usual victor but lions are no easy cat to kill the tiger would sustain some good amount of injuries before it can kill the lion the fight would be more like 5/10-7/10 for the tiger when faced against a lion. 
 
 
 
A siberian tiger would not fair very well at an average sized polar bear we are talking about 660 kg of bear vs 221 kg of cat on head on matches the tiger stands very little chances. If anything it should be Average Kodiak/polar bear vs big cats 9/10 for the bears.

I believe that even the biggest Siberian tiger would stand very little chance against a boar grizzly and no chance at all against a Kodiak or a polar bear. This does not mean that a tiger is a pushover. The big cats are still the better hunters.

There is no way a tiger of any kind could beat, lame or kill a Kodiak Brown Bear.It would just piss off the bear and then it would lunch

the thread creator is obviously biased towards tigers, according to him, a tiger wins against a brown bear, whilst a lion loses to an AMERICAN BLACK BEAR.

In Siberia, Tigers sometimes kill a female brown bear, but never a boar. Brown bears are too powerful for any big cat. As for lion vs American black bear, it could go either way. I think you are right, Gianmario.

tigers are more agressive than the lion .a tiger would win the fight because of his strongth and he would win the fight against the bear because of the speed

Toby Ross 
 
Tigers have killed male brown bears before in Siberia 
 
Nat.Geo. did a documentary once about two large male brown bear found died which might have been killed by the same siberian tiger on separate incidences but for all we know the bears might have been ambused or were hibernating but yes females and cubs are usually taken especially the cubs. 
 
 
 
The lion vs bear would be around 5/10-7/10 for the lion, we need to look at the fact that lions don't really fight big preditors like tigers do, tigers have to live with black,sloth and brown bears but lions only have hyena to handle which usually will run away at first sight of a male lion. The lion would be the usual winner but it will have injuries. 
 
 
 
But I do agree, the guy here is biased in his claims for he is also wrong about the size of the animals if anything he might have inflated the tiger to make it be that big for most male tigers don't pass the 600 pound mark.

Ok, these are all interesting posts and I must say informational.I think the advantage would have to go to the home team. By that I mean If the confrontation was in Siberia the tiger would probably win. If the confrontion was on the Copper River in Alaska the Grizzly would win.Now take both animals and put them in Grudge match some where in East St.Louis...Id say its a draw.I think we need to do this! What do you say? Lets settle this once and for all

Siberian tigers do confront brown bears in Siberia. The big male bear always wins. Only an occasional female bear is sometimes killed by a tiger. And this is rare. A lion or a tiger is no match for a brown bear.

well from my reserch and waching what all u guys say some one must be rong becuz both sides seme to prove there animal is the winer. iff we put the animals in a cage the bear would win every time cuz theres no were for the tiger to move. in the wiled witch is what were talking about here tigers use there asansin like skills. this cat gets on the bears back i give it to the tiger. the tiger would probly perform a hit and run face to face with a bear i could go ether way. now for the lions. male lions are said to be the most agreesive cat and have the most stamina. lions are nown to cercal pray or ennamys that are biger then them. waiting for an opertunity. just like in the black bear vs lion video the lion emeditly starts cercaling the bear. but i haf to give it to the bear in grizzly vs lion just becuz the lion has no really teknek like the tiger. tiger asasanat lions go head to head.

The proof is in the pudding! Watch your nature programs. Brown bears do live in Siberia. These fights do happen. Therefore it is a well known documented fact that male brown bears kill tigers. Not often. Only when a tiger is desperate enough to attack a large bear.

There are alot of studies where tigers and bears conflict usually it's the bear trying to steal from a tiger or the bear is defending itself. 
 
There are documents that claim that male siberian tigers will go after sows while male brown bears will go after tigress. 
 
 
 
The fact is tigers will put up a much better fight when fighting a Grizzly because Grizzly bears are smaller than Siberian brown bears but even so the bear will still take the fight 
 
Siberian Male tiger vs Male Grizzle-6/10 for the bear 
 
Siberian Male tiger vs Male Russian brown-8/10 for the bear  
 
Siberian tiger vs Male Kodiak bear 9/10 for the bear same can be said in a polar bear fight. 
 
 
 

i was just watching a program on animal planet that was about the animals of the far est of russia and ever study they did proves the siberian tigers kill and pray on adalt male brown bears by jumping on there backs

Only a very hungry desperate tiger will attack a brown bear. And then, only a young immature bear or a smaller female. More often, it is the bear who comes in to take a kill away from a the tiger. The tiger can defend it's meal from a young bear or a female. But a fully grown boar can take the food away from the tiger.

Toby Ross you keep denying that a tiger can kill a full grown male brown bear and there are evidence that prove male tigers have killed adult male brown bears before no one is saying that the tiger wins most of the time but there is no way a full grown male brown bear can beat a tiger all the time 
 
TLK ia right i have seen that show on Nat Geo where 2 large male brown bear were found died and they said a tiger killed them and may i remind you they said large male brown bear not a young male and not a female bear but a large male brown bear.

The body of an Orca was once found with shark bites taken from it. That does not prove that the sharks killed the Orca.  
 
The tiger was found with the dead body of a brown bear. Proves nothing.

wrong again beside the fact that the bear was covered in marks created by the tiger evidence in the snow showed signs of a struggle and the blood was only a couple days old even the locals said it was a tiger who did it.

I have also seen documentaries of Bigfoot, the Abominable snowman, and the Lock Ness Monster. Never-the-less, brown bears and polar bears are the earth's top land predators.

I agree with you about your last statement like i said no one is saying the tiger wins most of the time but the bear does not win all the time 
 
think about it Nat Geo as all that tech there is no way that they will just asume the tiger killed the bear because they found its body and a tiger near by, they use the same equipment used to find criminals when they did their investigation , they could even tell you the time the bear and the tiger met and if the bear died exactly after his fight or a couple hours later but like you said bears are indeed the ultimate predator 
 
 
 
and where you said the male bear will always steal a kill from the tiger errors are in that for i've seen a female puma stand up to a big male grizzly for her kill and the bear backed down even though he had more that enough power to knock the puma silly so the i will say the bear doesn't always get what it wants from a tiger.

Alright. Kung Fu, the first matial arts began when a Shoulin monk witnissed a stork defending her nest from a tiger.  
 
It is theoretically possible for a tiger to kill a grizzy. The tiger could have attacked a sleeping bear. The bear may have been sick or injured already. The bear might have been a very old bear or crippled from an old injury.  
 
In Old California, when owned by Spain, they used to have animal fights regularly in an arena. They kept records of these events. They had an American grizzly which took on and defeated all rivals. This included both lions and tigers. Of course, who is to say just how healthy any particular animal was before each fight began?

toby 
 
 
 
were talking about the wild her not som close rang fighting cage of corse the bear would win but in the wild the tiger is the assan. there was a programe about the animals of the far est of russia. the russion brown bear a tipe of deer, wolfs, a tipe of brown bear, then it said but the king of them all the siberian tiger known to stalk and kill large male brown bears as a natuarl food source. tiger sneeks up behind jumps on there back and the bears done. a tiger can take enney bear iff they jump on there backs. but head to head the bear wins

This site is about a fight. Not some "one in a million happening" where a tiger jumps on the back of an old sickly bear and then by sheer luck manages to stay alive. This is about a face-to-face fight between a Siberian tiger and a grizzly bear.

I would like to see a Siberian Tiger take on my Mother in Law. Now that would be a good cat fight!

yes toby ross its theorectically possible for a tiger to kill a bear but that theory has been proven just like the blach hole theory no one knew it existed after all it was just a theory but now they have proof it does exist just like they have proof that in conforntations between brown bears and tigers the bear does not win all the time regardless of health,gender,size and i guess what the induvidual animal is like 
 
 
 
for intanse the crane that was defending her nest from a tiger, you and i both know that any tiger can kill any crane that is on the ground in a flash but it didn't likewise any large male grizzly can kill any female puma/any big cat if it wanted to but it didn't it retreated it just turned its back to the puma and left. 
 
 
 
and also there have been records of large male siberian tigers found dead and it was said that they were killed by russain bears but like you said no one knows if these tigers were healthy or not it also could have been sick or injured bears are also hunters too maybe the tiger was ambused but who knows.

According to Wikipedia... 
 
Large adult brown bears seem to be immune to tiger attacks during the Summer months, but are sometimes killed in their dens during the Winter. Tigers are killed by brown bears when the bear is attacked or when the bear is defending his kill.

<<Large adult brown bears seem to be immune to tiger attacks during the Summer months, but are sometimes killed in their dens during the Winter. Tigers are killed by brown bears when the bear is attacked or when the bear is defending his kill.>>  
 
 
 
 
 
well i went to wikipedia and read the siberian tiger article and it said this; 
 
 
 
'Grown brown bears are usually immune from tiger attacks.' 
 
 
 
 
 
note the sentence said 'usually' meaning most of the time and not all the time. you can visit it now if you want. 
 
 
 
 
 
wikipedia also states that young tigers are killed by brown bears ,once again note the sentence 'young tigers' 
 
 
 
if you read the Interspecific Predatory Relationships in the tiger article it even says that tigers do kill adult brown bear on occasions. 
 
 
 

http://www.amur-leopard.org/index.php?id=342 
 
check this out every knows that a mother bear is the worst land carnivorous animal to mess with but yet tigers can drive them off from their cubs  
 
mother bears have been known to fight to the death for their cubs but tigers can drive them away.

Yes, on rare occasions, a tiger will kill a full grown female brown bear. Adult male brown bears are known to kill young adult tigers who are in their prime. No tiger can kill a full grown brown bear who is awake, alert, and healthy.

and yet there are records of tigers killing large healthy adult brown male bears that are awake 
 
once a tiger was seen fighting a bear both animals were said to be in their prime and the bear retreated into a near by tree the tiger did not follow the bear up the tree but went into the bushes instead after some intense hours the bear finally decided to leave the tree for the wind was not blowing in his favour the wind was blowing his scent towards the tiger and not the other way around and was ambused and kill by the same tiger 
 
 
 
the bear was a collared healthy male the tiger was unknown to the locals maybe the tiger was a new male looking for a territory the status of the tiger was also unknown, 
 
 
 
there are even records of hunters tracking tigers and have wittness fights between tigers and bears and the bear fleeing from the tiger instead of facing it  
 
one hunter even claimed the bear hesitating to fight the tiger but the tiger came at it anyway  
 
 
 
and i think you are getting the young tiger sentence wrong for adult sloth bears can drive off young tigers from their kill but adult tigers eat adult sloth bears so it is not a young adult but a young and inexperienced tigers the bears usually kill i thimk you need to read it again.

Adult brown bears do not climb trees to escape danger. The only danger being human hunters. However, juvenile brown bears climb trees when frightened. Therefore, the tiger was after bear cubs, not an adult male brown bear. Another reason this fabricated story doesn't make sense is the fact that a tiger can jump very high. One would have to climb very high very fast to escape a tiger.  
 
There is no animal in the forest that a brown bear would flee, unless it is a bigger bear.

lol you are such a denial 
 
http://www.loukashkin.org/Tigers/index.htm 
 
 
 
in this record the bear was headed for the tree but the tiger got to it before it could climb and the bear manage to free itself from the tiger's grip and ran away and like i said it was from a hunter 
 
 
 
so i guess bears also run from tigers too and not just a bigger bear 
 
and the bear was head for a tree indicating it wanted to climb it. 
 
 
 
if i remember where the site was of the collared bear climbing the tree i would post for i do not need to make up a story that can be found on the internet.lol 
 
 
 
in india bears and leopards escape tiger by climbing up trees 
 
 
 
if you have seen Tiger spy in the jungle you would have seen the tigress chasing a leopard and the leopard climbs in the tree the tigress tries to climb the tree but gives up and tigess wasn't even half way up the tree. 
 
 
 
black,sloth and brown bears have been docomented to hide in trees from tigers the tiger could have jumped but how far up would you think it would reach with just one leap? so a tiger does not always climb a tree to get to its prey. 
 
 
 
you don't have to beleive if you don't want man but there is proof and if i can find that record i'll post it in a heart beat 
 
and if you check the amur leopard site i posted before where actual scientist have been you would see it saying that tigers do hunt grown brown bears. 
 
 
 

http://www.geocities.com/lion_versus_tiger/further_info/news_article_1899.htm 
 
records of lions killing brown bears

i made a mistake and posted the wrong record here is the real thing 
 
 
 
http://wildanimalelite.yuku.com/topic/40/master/1/ 
 
 
 
what i have also learned is that siberian tigers are infact poor climers when compared to leopards and even bears 
 
there are many people in the US that are attacked by brown bears and they say that when they try to climb up trees the bear just bolt up the trees after them so bears are prety good climbers you know.

Stories. Chr1$t is reading stories. I went to a circuis show once to see Gargantua "the killer gorilla". They told outlandish stories about their monster. As a kid, I believed them. I also remember watching stories on film about gorillas invading native villages to steal women.  
 
One site that you sent me to were stories told from circuis people to advertise their "great lion". Another site were simply tiger stories. You should read some the the tales told by "big game hunters" of the 1800s and early 1900s! Outlandish! 
 
Do you really believe that a thousand pound bear is going to run from a 600 pound tiger?

I just finished a great deal of research. NOW, I must admit that YES, Siberian tigers, being the awesome predators that they are, do in fact ( when other meat is scarce ) hunt and kill brown bears. This is told in Wikipedia under Siberian tigers. They kill by "hide and ambush" strategy.  
 
So, from a sneaky ambush, a tiger can kill a brown bear. But, like all natural hunters ( and unlike humans ) the tiger will not purposely choose the biggest bear. But, I will admit, that no bear is safe in tiger country.  
 
The artical also says that many brown bears benefit from the tigers. These are bears that have learned to follow the tiger and take his dinner. The tiger is a more skillful hunter. The bear is simply bigger and stronger.  
 
In a face-to-face fight, my money is still on the grizzly. But, I think that tigers are awesome predators.  
 
I also learned that there are 2 kinds of brown bears in Siberia. One is the "black grizzly" which is more closely related to the American grizzly. The other is a huge relative of our Kodiak bear.  
 
Tigers are awesome! I say that the tiger is the top predator where ever he lives. The brown bear is "king of the hill". More like some views of T-rex. He does more bullying and taking food than actual hunting.  
 
But, in a face-off, the bear still wins.

Siberian tiger. 500-700 pounds. 
 
Brown bear. 800-1500 pounds. 
 
Size and strength are on the bear. 
 
Stamina is on the bear. 
 
Speed... tiger ( maybe ).

lol 
 
 
 
you seem to think that i said the tiger would be the winner no toby ross i actually agree with you any large species of bear will destroy any member of the cat family but even so the bear will not win all the time and likewise tigers are also not safe in bear country either. 
 
 
 
no one said a bear cannot steal from a tiger, where are you getting this stuff from? if you check Wikipedia it says a tiger will “SOMETIMES” defend its kill like I said before a bear does not always gets what it wants from a tiger but there are also smaller animals the bear can steal from and bears are omnivores so they don’t need to eat meat all the time  
 
 
 
for the bear fleeing from the tiger to save its life yeah I do believe it can happen for a male grizzly bear backing down from a female puma as happened before and pumas are way smaller than tigers, once again Wikipedia also states that brown bears have been known to change there paths when they come across tiger tracks while others will sometimes follow the tiger's tracks without fear. 
 
 
 
but like I said if you don’t want to believe you don’t have to no one is forcing you to but records are there.  
 

We are getting way off track here. This is not about sneak attacks and who can steal whose dinner. This is animal face-off. Two wild animals standing face-to-face, then go at it!  
 
A 600 hundred pound tiger is facing a 1200 pound brown bear. The bear is standing 8 feet tall. The tiger springs toward his death. The bear ( a full grown male ) wins every time.

WOW! I just watched that video that you have been talking about. Siberian tiger vs brown bear. Total buffalo chips! This is a video put together by someone who simply likes tigers.  
 
It talks about a 900 pound tiger. It claims that tigers sprint 50 mph through the forest. Buffalo chips!  
 
 
 
You see a grizzly climbing a tree. If you look closely, it is a juvenile bear. Then you see a tiger walking through the forest. You do not see both animals in one shot. Yet they are claiming that the bear is fleeing the tiger. This video claims that brown bears are simply a common food source for tigers. Nonsense!  
 
I will grant you that on rare occasions, when a tiger is desperate for food, he might attack an adult male brown bear. This is a savage ambush, which tigers are probably the worlds best at.  
 
I believe that the tiger is the apex predator is his home range. This is because the grizzly is more of an oppertunist than a predator. The brown bear eats vegetation, fish, rodents, and carrion more often than he hunts and kills.  
 
But, in a face-off, the grizzly is the undisputable champion.

I like tigers better, but sorry; Grizzly wins. They are too tough to be taken down by a tiger head to head.  
 
Even after confrontation, I would bet a tiger flees after a couple failed attempts at downing his opponent. Thats how most predators are. They cant waste energy with a prey that cannot be taken down easily. This is why many tend to hunt in packs. 
 
I was surprised to see 70% are in favor of the tiger winning.

Most of the experts on allexperts agree that the outcome of this fight is 6/10 in favour of the Grizzly.

thats right TLK i even posted some links 
 
 
 
 
 
Toby Ross 
 
 
 
you seem to do a lot of reading but little understanding  
 
 
 
first off 
 
 
 
i did not tell you to watch anything so i have no idea of what you are talking about if anything i think you should re-read my comments 
 
 
 
one of your respond was that a bear will not run from anything but a bigger bear and that my comment was made up so i gave you a link of a hunter's record of a tiger trying to kill a bear and the bear gets away and runs off 
 
 
 
i did not mention anything about a video nor did i even post a link to a video so i'm still wandering where you got that from  
 
 
 
links: 
 
 
 
 
 
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Interspecies-Conflict-3754/Tiger-vs-Grizzly-Bear-2.htm 
 
 
 
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Interspecies-Conflict-3754/Grizzly-Vs-Tiger-other.htm 
 
 
 
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Interspecies-Conflict-3754/2009/4/easter-special.htm 
 
 
 
 
 
thats only a few of them you can visit the site if you want and ask your own questions. 
 

I will simplify it for you. 
 
In a face-off, a grizzy will kill a Siberian tiger every time.

LOL like i said man you don't have to believe if you don't want to but even experts disagree with you 
 
 
 
what you say is just a mere opinion but experts have been in the field and not on their computers reading wikipedia lol you can even check out the lion vs black bear blog where a discussion between six person who really know thier stuff and do not rely on wikipedialol agree the out for lion vs brow bear is 8/10 for the bear LOL 
 
 
 
im out

In an ambush attack, a tiger might kill a grizzly. Also, because any injury can be long-lasting for any wild animal, a grizzly might flee rather than participate in an unneccassary fight. Never-the-less, that is NOT what this site is about. 
 
In a face-off ( do you chr!$t understand face-off )... In a face-off, the grizzly would defeat the tiger every time.

Toby Ross 
 
 
 
allexperts is also talking about a face to face combat 
 
 
 
do you think it is fair for the bear if the experts make the tiger ambush the bear? 
 
 
 
no fight can be a 10/10 because anything can happen experts say on a headon combat the fight would be 6/10 for the bear you need to understand that.

I think you guys are going about this all wrong. 
 
 
 
A grizzly bear as never seen a tiger before but the tiger can easily mistake the grizzly for a smaller Siberian brown bear. 
 
 
 
Siberian brown bears are far more aggressive than any grizzly because they have to watch their backs form tigers. 
 
 
 
A grizzly bear does not have much competition in its domain only every now and then does a brave puma stand up to it.  
 
 
 
But a tiger is much bigger and stronger than a puma and is very confident in taking down pretty much anything the cat as speed on its side not to mention it taken on brown bears before. 
 
 
 
The grizzly as strength and size as its facter but it as never seen a tiger before and even so its used to things fleeing from it so is the tiger. 
 
 
 
In a caged match I have to say I agree with chr1$T 6/10 for the bear. 
 
 
 
Experts have stated that about 80% of a grizzly bear charges are buffs the tiger might have seen through some of them and even use it as an opportunity.

I like the way you analyzed that Zeroman. 
 
6/10 is also my best bet. 
 
 
 
Toby Ross  
 
 
 
I think what you are saying is really just your oppinion because you have changed your mind several times before and I get the feeling you don't know much on this topic. 
 
 
 
But like wise no matter what the animals a fight can never be 10/10. 
 

Siberian brown bears have been known to kill Siberian tigers, (the largest of the wild big cats of the modern day) 60-70% of the time. 
 
Same can be said for grizzly vs siberian tigers on headon confrontations.

I made a mistake what I meant was no matter the circumstances and not animals.

I change my mind only when I have been proven wrong. But, in a face to face encounter, the grizzly will defeat the tiger every time.  
 
It is like if you put Stone Cold Steve Austen in the ring against Don Knotts, Stone Cold will win every time. *Same thing.

IF you put George Foreman in the ring against Danny Deveto, George is going to win every time, just like the grizzly win defeat the tiger every time.

Toby Ross  
 
 
 
go and ask an expert 
 
 
 
siberian tiger vs grizzly bear 
 
 
 
6/10 for the bear. 
 
 
 

I really don't undersatnd how you can put animals in the same category as humans 
 
 
 
when we face off it either for money or to prove someting about being a man 
 
 
 
when animal fight its a fight for survival 
 
 
 
6/10 for the bear  
 
like i said go and ask an expert becuse you know nothing of this topic.

Toby Ross  
 
 
 
i did some thinking and i dont know why but i get the feeling im talking to a 12 year old because you think that all fights will go the same way as if the all tigers attack the same way and all bears will respond in the same way. 
 
 
 
have you ever had more than one dog before becuase if you did you would see that they do not behave the same way in certain situations 
 
 
 
but heres a test 
 
 
 
out of 10 fights how much time do you think the bear would win if he was facing a king penguin? 
 
 
 
my answer is 9/10 for the bear 
 
 
 
if you answer the question i'll tell you the reason for my answer.  
 

OK. In a face-off between an adult male grizzly and an adult male tiger, the tiger could win if... 
 
the grizzly is very old and toothless. 
 
the grizzly has a bad heart. 
 
The grizzly was recently shot. 
 
the grizzly just ate 10 pounds of rat poison. 
 
But, if both animals are healthy, the grizzly will win every time.

Oh, about the penguin. In the water, right?

I know very well that Mother Natures animals are not like people. But, who is being childish here? 
 
Chr1$t...you cannot admit that a grizzly bear 1200 to 1500 pounds can defeat a tiger weighing from 500 to 650 pounds. Even if they both weighed the same, the grizzly would be much stronger.  
 
The point I was trying to make, and simplifying it for you, is that when one animal overpowers the other so much, there can only be one outcome.  
 
But, if you want to believe that the tiger can defeat a grizzly twice his size...

Toby Ross  
 
 
 
we are talking about face - face healthy animals ok 
 
 
 
Have you contacted an expert yet? 
 
 
 
grizzly vs. king penguin on land 
 
 
 
Will you stop inflating the bear's size? you keep giving the size of a kodiak to the grizzly when this is a fight between a grizzly and a tiger not a kodiak and a tiger. 
 
 
 
here educate yourself about the grizzly bears size they do not average well above 800 pounds. Bears have been reported to reach this size but its not their average. 
 
 
 
http://www.mountainnature.com/wildlife/Bears/BearID.htm 
 
 
 
http://www.edu.pe.ca/southernkings/grizzly.htm 
 
 
 
http://www.bearaware.bc.ca/bears/bears_content_grizzly3bb.html 
 
 
 
even wikipedia 
 
 
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grizzly_Bear 
 
 
 
and here 
 
 
 
http://animals.nationalgeographic.com/animals/mammals/grizzly-bear.html 
 
 
 
http://www.greatbear.org/brownbear.htm 
 
 
 
http://www.jstor.org/pss/3872615 
 
 
 
where are you getting that size info from anyway? 
 
 
 
i'm trying to analyze your case 
 
so you think that when a 310 pound tigress or a 480 pound male tiger ambushes a 160-700 pounds brown bear as soon as the tiger is on the bears back the bear will just roll over and get killed it won't fight back far its life are you are saying that, that cannot happen, are you saying that a tiger who knows what a bear is will not try to maneuver its way around the grizzly so that in an head on confrontation the tiger can kill the bear ambush style? 
 
 
 

you think size is the only factor here don't you  
 
 
 
we all know that elephants are the largest and the strongest land animal right  
 
 
 
we know that when we mention strength they are in a whole different category right 
 
 
 
Toby Ross  
 
 
 
have you seen Tiger Spy in the Jungle yet? where they talk of the ruling 250 kg male tiger named Charger, he got that name because he was not afraid to charge at elephants face to face even in the documentary he was charging at the two elephants that carried the camera.  
 
3,000–5,000 kg are the size range and only african elephants get to bigger sizes of all other land aniamls. 
 
Do you know what an indochinese tiger is ? they are only about a few pounds lighter than the average african male lion but in the past they were used in caged match to take on asian bull elephants; 
 
 
 
Of all the land carnivores, the tiger is the only species that has been known to charge and take down a full-grown male elephant, one-on-one. The killing of the elephant was called "Death by a Thousand Claws" by Colonel Kesri Singh. The killing for centuries in Asia, especially in Indochina, where elephants used to be utilized in military as weapons, minor ethnic tribes, who are specialized in capturing and training elephants, have the traditions of testing captured male elephants by pressing one against a tiger. If an elephant survives the fight, it is considered ideal for battles. “ 
 
 
 
Do you know that the asains used elephants as war tool back then right? 
 
 
 
You can call this a story too if you want and this one as wel’l though I gave the name of one of the guys 
 
 
 
“One British hunter reported a long fight between a tiger and elephant in which the tiger killed the elephant by 1,000 cuts. The British hunter and Dr. Frank Mendel of the university of buffalo confirm this. “ 
 
 
 
But the size and health of the elephant was not given so I don’t know where this stands. 
 
 
 
http://citynewslive.com/fullstory2k5-insight-news-status-29-newsID-6008.html 
 
 
 
this is a record between a tigress and an elephant where she was trying to protect her cubs 
 
 
 
all of these are head on fight between tiger and elephants and as you can see its not just a one time incident but you can call it a story if you want no one is stopping you from not believing 
 
 
 
and these are fight not animal preyed upon because the tiger did not eat them after wards  
 
 
 
and when you read please understand too 
 
size cannot be the only factor in a fight but how the animals react to each other when caged can be the determine factor 
 
Siberian tiger vs grizzly 6/10 for the bear 
 

Toby Ross  
 
 
 
out of 10 fights how many times do you think a polar bear will kill a kodiak bear?

OK. We had been talking about brown bears in general. But, we will stick with American grizzly. 
 
Grizzly advantages include: 
 
Size ( 800 lbs vs 600 lbs ). 
 
Strength ( the grizzly is far stronger ). 
 
Stamina / endurance ( cats are short-winded ). 
 
intellegence ( bears are smarter than cats ). 
 
Speed ( probably equal ). 
 
NOW...what advantage does a tiger have? You say that the grizzly will win 6 out of 10 fights. Yet, the tiger has absolutely no advantage over the grizzly.

Toby Ross 
 
 
 
lol you are reading but not getting the point 
 
 
 
now i'm convinced i'm talking to a child 
 
 
 
the tiger also has no advantage over elephants but you have records of lone tigers fighting elephants face to face and one on one and killing it. 
 
 
 
when you understand what you have read let me know :D 
 
 
 
Are you not contacting the expert because you are afaid of what they might say? 
 
 
 
you want me to answer your question but at the same time you have yet to answer any of mine. 
 
 
 
Siberian tiger vs grizzly 6/10 for the bear

chr1$T  
 
I think all you are doing is wasting your time here with some kid 
 
 
 
He didn't even know the size range of the grizzly bear for crying out loud. 
 
You gave records but what as he given nothing but opinions. 
 
 
 
Trust me all you are doing is wasting your time Chr1$t.  
 

I very well know the size range of an American grizzly. But, we had got to talking about brown bears in general. They are all just one species, with the American grizzly being a sub-species.  
 
Elephants????  
 
We are not talking about elephants here, boy. A grizzly will kill a tiger in a face-to-face fight 10 out of 10 times.  
 
And you are correct. The tiger has no advantage. So, how do you suppose he is going to win 6 out of 10 fights?

According to Wikipedia, American grizzly ( male ) 500 - 1000 pounds. But, I'll settle for an 800 pound grizzly against even the biggest tiger ( smile ). 
 
Tell me Chr!$t, how many fights out of 10 would you suppose a hamster would win in a face-off against a wolverine? Here again, one animal seems to have all of the advantages.

Toby Ross 
 
 
 
still have not answered any of my question and you look like you have not read my comments 
 
 
 
now go read again I even posted a link of a fight between a tigress and an elephant where the wounds the elephant get from the tigress caused its death and this was a face to face clash. 
 
 
 
 
 
once again go and re-read my post 
 
 
 
check wikipedia again 
 
 
 
 
 
Siberian tiger vs grizzly 6/10 for the bear 
 
 
 
i ask again have you contacted an expert yet? 
 
 
 
 
 
Salva i do agree with you but if he is not even reading my comments then he would never understand.

Toby Ross 
 
 
 
is anewering my questions so hard? 
 
 
 
and if you decide to re read my comments please understamd. 
 

Toby Ross 
 
lol 
 
the size range for brown bears in general is 300 - 1700 pounds you had 1200-1500 pounds meaning you were talking about the kodiak bear and not talking about brown bears in general 
 
 
 
lol 
 
 
 
so i guess that makes you a lier or you really did not know the size range and is lying about that too huh? lol 
 
 
 
and i did not answer your question about advantages was stating a fact which you read and once again did not understand 
 
 
 
lol

I know that tigers have been known to take down Asian elephants. I remember watching a film taken of one such encounter back in the 50's or early 60's.  
 
But, a grizzly is not a herbivore. He is a powerful carnivore. We are not talking about a tiger facing an 800 pound cow. This is an animal that has been known to break the neck of a bull bison will a single blow of a powerful arm.  
 
Your Bengal tiger killing an elephant carries no weight here. You have convinced me that Siberian tigers have been known to kill full grown brown bears either by ambush or while the bear is sleeping. But, I believe that this is very rare and even under these circumstances, the tiger is not always victorious. 
 
But, in a face-to-face encounter, what chance does the tiger have?

You have been talking about brown bears! You have been saying that a Siberian tiger can take down a brown bear. Kodiaks and their Siberian relatives are from 1200 to 1500 pounds.  
 
But now...suddenly...it is all about the American grizzly. 
 
But, that is alright with me. A grizzly, 500 to 1000 pounds is still much more than a match for your tiger ( smile ).  
 
AND, the grizzly is simply a sub-species of brown bear ( in case this was previously unknown to you ).  
 
In Siberia, there are two kinds of brown bears. Big and bigger! It is no small wonder that the Siberian tiger is nearly extinct.

Toby Ross  
 
 
 
you even changed the size range more that once 
 
 
 
but since you are afarid of what an expert might tell you I'll just copy and paste a answer 
 
 
 
1)Technically, they do not coexist in the wild. Grizzlies are actually a subspecies of the brown bear (Ursus arctos) and are found only in North America.  
 
However, brown bears can also be found in Siberia, but they belong to another subspecies, the Siberian Brown Bear, which is about as big as Grizzly bears.  
 
 
 
Do they meet with tigers? Yes, and they are deadly enemies. There are reports of tigers killing adult bears while they were hibernating, or sometimes attacking them when awake (tigers will usually attack only females and cubs, but some large males have also been taken down). However, bears are usually to powerful for even a tiger to handle. Recently, two large male Siberian tigers were killed by Brown bears. It seems that bears try to steal prey from tigers, and since tigers are not really into sharing, fights are common. Or they used to be, at least. Today there are only a few siberian tigers, and encounters with bears (which are also endangered), are rare.  
 
 
 
So, who would win? Sometimes the bear, sometimes the tiger, that´s what actual encounters tell us... 
 
 
 
thats one answer and i can get more lol 
 

Toby Ross 
 
 
 
where are my answers? 
 
 
 
once agian go read wikipedia the article is brown bears 
 
 
 
where they say there are 3 types of brown bears living in siberia 
 
 
 
i'll even give you the scientific names 
 
 
 
Ursus arctos arctos  
 
Ursus arctos beringianus  
 
Ursus arctos collaris  
 
 
 
re-read my comment and understand this time

Chr1$t...There are 2 kinds of brown bears in Siberia. 
 
Ursus arctos collaris, the Siberian grizzly, also called the black grizzly. It is about the same size as the American grizzly. 
 
Ursus arctos beringianus is a close relative of the Kodiak bear and rivals the Kodiak in size.  
 
 
 
Either bear is more than a match for any tiger.

Bottom line...the grizzly will kill the tiger every time.

Toby Ross 
 
 
 
here is another answer from an expert that you are afaird of asking. 
 
 
 
 
 
2)Tigers are indeed capable of killing grizzly bears however these two animals don't co-exist. The Siberian or Amur tiger however does co-exist with the Siberian Brown bear. A tigers fighting style is not suited to take on that of a brown bears. And as I have said in my past answers would probably loose to a Siberian brown bear 6/10 times in a face off. However tigers have been known to kill brown bear females and her cubs. I have stated a report that I got from a brown bear book where a Siberian tiger killed one of two brown bear cubs while the mom and the second cub escaped by running up a tree. Of course males are taken as well during hybernation normally where the tiger catches the weak male off gaurd and wraps it's forequarters around the bears head and shoulder and bite's the neck. 
 
 
 
 
 
answers?

But, we are talking about a face-off between a full grown male grizzly and a full grown male Siberian tiger. Face-to-face.

Toby Ross  
 
 
 
where are my answers? 
 
 
 
siberian tiger vs gizzly bear 6/10 for the bear

 
 
Toby Ross 
 
 
 
re read that answer agian and try to understand  
 
 
 
you know don't re-read i will just copy and paste the part of the answer you seemed to miss 
 
 
 
And as I have said in my past answers would probably loose to a Siberian brown bear 6/10 times in a face off. 
 
 
 
can you tell me the two last words in that sentance

Your answer is based on nothing. 
 
The grizzly has every advantage. 
 
Here we go again. Size / strength / endurance / intelligence / and equal in speed.

I guess 4 out of 10 times, the bear rolls over and plays dead. Then the tiger rips out his throat.

Toby Ross 
 
 
 
And your answer is? 
 
 
 
have gone to an expert yet? 
 
 
 
you see i have experts to back me up what do you have your opinions?lol 
 
 
 
there are three types of bronw bears living in siberia go and read wikipedia again 
 
 
 
Death of a Thousand claws stated that tiger were put to elephants in caged match one on one 
 
 
 
the size of neither animals is given but there are size ranges for both aniamls  
 
all elephants were full-grown but the tigers who knows 
 
sometimes the elephant survive sometime it does 
 
 
 
an elephant is lager, stronger,intelligent and as stamina and by far one of the most aggressive animals but there you have tigers being able to kill them on face to face clash so why can't a tiger do the same to a bear which is smaller, no where near as strong as an elephant as less stamina and is less intelligent than an elephant?

Jeminy Crickets! 
 
The Bengal tiger killed the elephant. Got it!  
 
Now, back to Siberian tiger vs grizzly bear...Duh?

Toby Ross  
 
 
 
I just re check wikipedia and guess what i found out 
 
 
 
not 2 or 3 but 4 brown bear sub species in in siberia 
 
 
 
want the scientific names? lol

Toby Ross 
 
 
 
you still do not get the piont lol 
 
 
 
of me showimg those records you are still not understanding

I am so proud of you! 
 
What does that have to do with this face-off you keep dancing around. The tiger is totally over-matched here. But, you are not adult enough to admit it.  
 
Give me just one logical reason why you believe that the tiger will win 4 out of 10 fights against a grizzly.

A tiger can kill an elephant sometimes. A grizzly can kill a tiger every time. Got it.

You keep side-stepping the issue here. Why do you believe that a tiger will defeat a grizzly 4 out of 10 times in a face-off encounter?

Toby Ross 
 
 
 
lol 
 
 
 
man you are so silly lol 
 
 
 
i bet you did pretty poor in school didn't you, well thats if you have not droped out yet i mean lol  
 
 
 
my answers you have yet to anser when you answer them i will explain slowly so you can understand why the out comeout of this is  
 
 
 
siberian tiger vs gizzly bear 6/10 for the bear 
 
 
 
i hope you can atleast understand what those numbers mean lol 
 

You keep giving me these numbers. But, if you cannot explain them, they are just silly numbers.  
 
Give me just ONE good reason why you believe that a tiger can kill a grizzly 4 out of 10 fights. 
 
And, do not start talking about elephants. I know that tigers sometimes kill elephants. Sheeesh!

You know Chr!$T its almost funny that someone can go to Wikipedia and not see that they actaully give out the 4 sub species of bear living in Siberia. 
 
 
 
lol 
 
 
 
I was reading the comments and I was like why don't I have a look to confirm who was correct but I guess that's you again. 
 
 
 
Siberian tiger vs Grizzly bear 6/10 is my best bet.

And it is hillarious that Chr1$t can look up all of these BIG words, but cannot give me just one little reason for his answer. Perhaps he is simply unable to think for himself.

TLK  
 
 
 
i am just wondering how much time as he been to wikipeida and missed it 
 
 
 
im very aware 
 
 
 
you see he wants anwsers but at the same time all of my questions are avioded i wonder why? 
 
 
 
Toby Ross 
 
 
 
i said this before and i as usual will say it again until you answer my questions you can have your answer in a heart beat 
 
 
 
trust me 
 
 
 
siberian tiger vs grizzly bear 6/10 for the bear.

6 to 10 for the grizzly.  
 
But, what happens the other 4 fights? You have not explained that.

oh and like i said i will explain slowly so you can understand ok :D

Toby Ross 
 
 
 
where are my answers? 
 
 
 
do you want me to repost the questions? 
 
 
 
like i said in a heart beat  
 
 
 
siberian tiger vs grizzly bear 6/10 for the bear

It is taking you a long time to look up an answer.

NUMBERS. 
 
Give me reasons. Or, do you just make up numbers? Why do you believe that a tiger can defeat a grizzly 4 out of 10 fights? 
 
Is this question too much for your brain? Can you not "look up an answer"?

For me lol 
 
please those question i asked you are so easy lol 
 

Toby Ross  
 
 
 
re check the comments i asked you questions first and what do you do? you skip them out completey and now you want me to just forget about my questions and answer yours 
 

NO Chr1$t. 
 
The questions are mine. Why do you believe that a tiger can defeat a grizzly 4 out of 10 fights? 
 
Repeat. 
 
Why do you believe that a tiger can out fight a grizzly 4 out of 10 times?

YOU keep talking about elephants!!!!!!

ASK your question.

Toby Ross 
 
 
 
oh you seem a little angry lol 
 
 
 
seriously i can repsot if you want :D

All I know is you keep talking about elephants???? 
 
WHY do you believe that a tiger can kill a grizzly in 4 out of 10 fights?  
 
Have you still not been able to look up an answer?

Toby Ross  
 
 
 
you keep seeing elephants becuase you only read what you want to read but here they are; 
 
 
 
1)out of 10 fights how much time do you think the bear would win if he was facing a king penguin on land and state your reasons and i will state mine? 
 
 
 
2)Have you contacted an expert yet? 
 
 
 
3)So you think that when a 310 pound tigress or a 480 pound male tiger ambushes a 160-1000 pounds brown bear as soon as the tiger is on the bears back the bear will just roll over and get killed it won't fight back for its life? 
 
 
 
4) Are you saying that a tiger who knows what a bear is will not try to maneuver its way around the grizzly (who is unaware of what a tiger is) so that in an head on confrontation the tiger can kill the bear ambush style?  
 
 
 
5) Do you beleive that all grizzly will react the same way in the persece of a tiger and why? 
 
 
 
6)out of 10 fights how many times do you think a polar bear will kill a kodiak bear?  
 
 
 
now can we please get somewhere?

One way to side-step an ARGUMENT is to avoid the question, which you are doing. Because you have no answer. You do not know why you say the tiger wins 4 out of 10 fights. You just want to say it.

#1...10 
 
#2...there are no x-sperts. 
 
#3...in an ambush, the tiger goes for the throat. If the grizzly cannot dislodge the tiger quickly enough, thye tiger wins. 
 
#4...no. The bear is not stupid. The tiger is not facing a cow. The tiger cannot outsmart the grizzly. 
 
 
 
Yes.The grizzly will slap the tiger. the tiger goes down. 
 
Polar bear vs Kodiak is an even match. 50%

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm??? 
 
Chr1$t must be searching for answers to his own questions.  
 
How can he ever hope to answer mine?

What is so difficult about my question Chr1$t?  
 
You claim that the tiger can defeat the grizzly 4 out of 10 fights.  
 
But, you can give no explanation. 
 
How long is it going to take you to look up an answer?

Toby Ross  
 
 
 
Those are not good enough answers but seeing as you made an attempt i will stick to the deal. 
 
 
 
you know i don't even know why i try its not like you would read through it carefully and atleast try to understand 
 
 
 
And this is why I asked question# 4 and guess what you agreed with me. 
 
 
 
A grizzly bear does not know what a tiger is... hope u got that, well let’s say you did 
 
 
 
but a tiger like Zeroman pointed out can easily mistake a grizzly for a smaller 
 
Siberian brown bear… hope you got that one too 
 
 
 
you were over looking the fact that the tiger as experience (just like a lion is an experienced fighter) with taking on brown bears because its not all the time the tiger will get to kill the brown bear when it tries to ambush it the bear will fight back if it gets the chance  
 
 
 
but a grizzly as no experience when facing a tiger if anything some grizzly might investigate and others could not careless of what a tiger is 
 
 
 
the bear as size, strength ,stamina and is a little slow but the tiger as ferocity, experience and can execute a much faster attack than a grizzly because they are build as such are you getting this so far? 
 
the bear will not know what to expect but the tiger who as had experience will always know what to expect, the tiger will try to avoid a blow from the bear because one blow can seriously injure the tiger or cause instant death. 
 
Tigers has you know are very cautious animals and in a caged match where there is no escape a tiger will not just jump head on at a bear just like that because that is suicide, he will circle the bear and look of weak spot  
 
The bear not knowing what the tiger is again will not know what to expect  
 
Sometimes tiger’s calculation is off causing him his life but other times because he as experience and the bear does not the tiger can out maneuver the bear because he know what to expect. 
 
 
 
 
 

Toby Ross  
 
 
 
are you saying out of the 10 bears not one bear will try to swallow the penguin whole and choke on it killing it.

I'll start with that stupid comment about the penguin. Bears are not stupid. They are, in fact, smarter that cats, wolves, dogs, and horses. A grizzly is not going to try to swallow a penguin whole.

Have you ever heard of instinct? Do you have a clue what instinct is? 
 
Inherited memory.  
 
Brown bears migrated into America from Siberia. Their ancestors lived with first the cave lion, then the American lion. Also, Siberian tigers.  
 
 
 
Besides, a grizzly doesn't care what you are. He is going to knock the tiger in the head and break his neck. You want to say that the tiger will outsmart the grizzly, thinking that, because the grizzly is bigger and stronger, that the cat is going to outsmart him.  
 
Sorry Chr1$t, bears are smarter than cats.

Toby Ross  
 
 
 
point out exactly where i said cats can out smart bears? 
 
 
 

Again. Grizzly bears are bigger, stronger, smarter, have more endurance, and are just as fast. 
 
I watched on Animal Planet where a grizzly ran down a caribou, caught him, and easily killed him. A tiger cannot do that.  
 
The grizzly has every advantage. Not having ever seen a tiger before makes absolutely no difference. 
 
But, it is nice to know that you admit that a Siberian brown bear, who knows what a tiger is, will win the fight everytime.

OK. 
 
You said that the tiger will circle around and ambush the bear. Buffalo chips! The bear will know exactly what the tiger is up to.

Besides... 
 
You are still trying to make an ambush attack out of this. The name of the game is face-off. A face-to-face encounter. Grizzly vs Siberian tiger head-on.

You stated that the grizzly is a little slow. Not so. Just because he is big does not make him slow. And, good luck on finding a weak spot.  
 
I believe that is is just a simple matter of you not being able to admit that the tiger is out-matched by the grizzly bear. You are still trying to make this an ambush attack.

Toby Ross  
 
 
 
you read and still do not understand 
 
when i said the bear was slow i meant in his speed not his smarts 
 
why do i even bother if you got that one wrong lol  
 
 
 
Toby Ross  
 
 
 
you go about instincts all wrong and let me show you of a more modern data 
 
 
 
lions eat warthogs… right 
 
a warthog first reaction when he sees a lion is to run for his dear life… right 
 
 
 
but there is a video on youtube of a lioness who laterally gets her ass kicked by the smaller warthog 
 
this lioness was a captive one and just like the grizzly who as never seen a tiger before the lioness as also never seen a warthog before  
 
you say instincts will kick in and let the bear know how to deal with a tiger but shouldn’t instinct kick in for the lioness and let her know that a warthog is food. 
 
Another recent case have you every seen swamp cats before which was a documentary on a type of lion pride that specialized in taking down prey in water, we all know that lions and hyenas and born enemies right 
 
But the lions form swamp cats have never seen hyenas before and because they have absolutely no knowledge of what hyenas are callable of 5 lioness let the hyenas steal from right under their noses 
 
Shouldn’t instinct kick here as well in and let the lions know the hyenas are the ones that should be fleeing from them 
 
Tell me why does instinct not kick in here in these cases? 
 

Toby Ross  
 
and lets get back to question #4 
 
what did it say 
 
this time read carefully this time  
 
 
 
Are you saying that a tiger who knows what a bear is will not try to maneuver its way around the grizzly (who is unaware of what a tiger is) so that in an head on confrontation the tiger can kill the bear ambush style?  
 
 
 
why do i even bother

Toby Ross 
 
 
 
and to let you know if a black bear is not used to the presense of a dog or a house cat it will flee at sight trust me i know.

Toby Ross  
 
 
 
i spend the whole evening on this site and i have no idea of how some people live on their computers but i can't  
 
 
 
how about we call this an evening and continue this well when ever because i don't have access to my computer like how you seem to have with yours.  
 
 
 
oh and tell me about the instinct whatever 
 
with the lions 
 
i asked about 
 
 
 
i'm out

lol chr!$T 
 
 
 
i don't see why that surprises you that he got it wrong he as alos gotten many others as well  
 
 
 
lol

Yes I saw the swamp lions. Black bears run from dogs because they associate them with humans.  
 
Yes, I know that the tiger will attempt to circle behind the grizzly because he knows that he doesn't stand a snowball's chance in a pizza oven against a grizzly. 
 
 
 
But, you seem to think that the grizzly will simply stand still and let the tiger manuver around behind him. No. 
 
Oh, and I understood what you were saying when you said that the grizzly is a little slow. No he isn't. Just because he is big, does not make him slow ( speed ). The grizzly is just as fast as the tiger, but not short-winded.

Salva. I didn't get anything wrong. 
 
Chr1$t cannot give me ONE reason why a tiger can defeat a grizzly.

The grizzly stands 8 feet tall. All 800 pounds of him. The 600 pound tiger ( rarely this big ) charges towards the grizzly bear. The tiger springs. The grizzly slaps the tiger with enough force to crush the skull of a bull. The tiger goes down. THE END.

Your version Chr1$t. 
 
The tiger tries to circle behind the grizzly. The tiger is affraid of a face-to-face encounter. 
 
But, the grizzly is too smart for this trick. The bear easily turns, keeping the tiger in sight.  
 
Finally, the frustrated tiger attacks. The grizzly kills him. THE END.

instinct = inherited memory. After millions of years of bears living in the same environment with big cats, the grizzly will have no trouble with one tiger.

I'm still waitting on just one reason why you believe a tiger can kill a grizzly in a face-to-face encounter. 
 
#1- because the tiger will sneak behind the grizzly. NO. That is not a face-off. 
 
#2- because the tiger will kill an elephant and the elephant will fall on the grizzly. NO. That would mean that the elephant killed the grizzly.  
 
#3- because while the tiger is circling around the bear, the grizzly will choke to death on a penguin? NO, not likely.

The grizzly is bigger. 
 
The grizzly is smarter. 
 
The grizzly is stronger. 
 
The grizzly has a more powerful bite force. 
 
The grizzly has more endurance. 
 
The grizzly is equally as fast. 
 
The tiger has no advantage over the bear. 
 
 
 
I have proven my point. Chr1$t can come up with nothing in favor of his triger. All he dishes out is double talk. I have proven my point. There is no need for my return. Chr1$t will never admit to his utter defeat.

Ussuri Brown Bear ( black grizzly )

The grizzly bear destroy the tiger.The tiger haven't chance,

Toby Ross 
 
 
 
I gave you an explanation whether or not you want to believe is your business. 
 
 
 
i tiger can execute a much faster attack than ant bear because tigers are build for such 
 
 
 
you say a bear can run done a caribou and a tiger can  
 
 
 
thats true because the bear as to use is stamina to tire out he prey first before he can get to kill it 
 
 
 
if a bear tried to execute an attack like the tiger then the caribou would have been long gone 
 
 
 
but if the tiger's calculations is correct by the time the caribou knew what hit him the tiger is already at his throat 
 
 
 
you don't believe the experts because they don't agree with your opinion buts thats ok 
 
 
 
you are just a denial 
 
 
 
but like i said i have experts to back me up the only thing you have is your opinion  
 
 
 
and if this was a court case you opinions would be dismissed 
 
 
 
Siberian tiger vs grizzly bear 6/10 for the bear 
 
 
 
the experts say this 
 

Toby Ross 
 
 
 
if i thought the bear would have just stand still and let the tiger circle it then the outcome of the fight would have 9/10 for the tiger 
 
 
 
and by the way dogs out smart bears by a landslides. 
 
 
 
 
 
Salva 
 
 
 
it does not surprise me that he could not understand my explanations 
 
 
 
just look at one of my past comments Wednesday December 16, 2009 10:02 PM 
 
and then read what he said on Thursday, December 17, 2009 6:42 AM 
 
 
 
clearly he does not understands what he reads because i made no comment about a video of a 900 pounds wild Siberian tiger(which by the way is ridiculous) 
 
but there he goes ranting about how i told him to watch a video  
 
 
 
if he got that wrong then what else could he have gotten wrong? 
 
 
 
siberian tiger vs grizzly bear 6/10 for the bear 
 

And look again i bet anyone here that he can not point out where i said a bear was slow because of his size 
 
 
 
i even wonder if he reads all of my comments lol 
 
 
 
siberian tiger vs grizzl bear 6/10 for the bear 
 

Hey chr!$T 
 
 
 
I was wondering when you would get here but I thing Toby Ross is contradicting is own words when he posted this: 
 
 
 
<<"Big and bigger! It is no small wonder that the Siberian tiger is nearly extinct.">> 
 
 
 
If he believes that bears are the reasons why tigers are endangered then I'm pretty sure tigers are also the reason why bears are endangered as well. 
 
 
 
Don't you think so too because both animals are very much close to extinction. 
 
 
 
Siberian tiger vs Grizzly bear 6/10 for the bear is my best bet  
 

Hey wats up 
 
 
 
lol if he really believes that then only God knows what he knows about these animals 
 
 
 
my take he knows nothing of course lol 
 
 
 
and if you can trust wikipeida over an expert then i would say you really have a problem because wikipedia is just as useful as this site 
 
 
 
in other words its very unreliable 
 
 
 
siberian tiger vs grizzly 6/10 for the bear 
 
 
 
lol he even went away without giving me an explanation for the two lions story i gave 
 
 
 
thats just like him to avoid something lol 
 

chr!$T 
 
 
 
lol like you expect him to stay 
 
 
 
I have been asked a question and I my self is not sure of the answer. 
 
 
 
Can you help me out? 
 
 
 
But later because I'm not at my house now and I'll soon have to leave the computer anyway.  
 
 
 
Siberian tiger vs Grizzly bear 6/10 for the bear is my best bet. 
 
 
 
Later

Sure 
 
 
 
siberian tiger vs grizzly 6/10 for the bear

You are still just playing with words. I gave you a full list of the advantages of the grizzly. All you can say is, "the tiger will sneak around behind the bear". And you believe that the grizzly will just stand still and let him do this.  
 
 
 
I know full well why wild animals are going extinct. People! 
 
Yes, you did say that grizzly bears are slow. They are not. 
 
Dogs do not out smart bears. Take away the hunter with the gun, and the dogs lose. Grizzly bears have been known to fight off a whole pack of wolves, which are stronger and smarter than dogs.  
 
*In a face to face confrontation, which this site is supposed to be about, the grizzly will kill the tiger.  
 
Now...do you still want to talk about elephants and penguins?

Make me a list of the advantages that you believe a tiger has over the grizzly. Here ( again ) is a list of some of the advantages that the grizzly has. 
 
SIZE - STRENGTH - GREATER BITE FORCE - STAMINA - INTELLIGENCE. 
 
If you cannot do this, it is understandable.

I will give in just this much... 
 
IF both animals weigh the same thing: Let's say a 600 pound grizzly face-to-face against a 600 pound tiger, then perhaps the grizzly will win 6 out of 10 fights. 
 
These so-called experts give the bear 6 o 10 odds probably figuring on bears of various sizes.

EXPERTS. 
 
Jane Goodall is an expert on chimpanzees because she spent years living with them. 
 
Diane Fossey was an expert on gorillas for the same reason. 
 
Noone is living with Siberian tigers. Noone is walking along side-by-side with the tiger as he hunts. Naturalists get glimpses of tigers. They see where tigers have been. They see footprints in the snow. There are no real experts.

Timothy Treadwell, the grizzly man. 
 
He lived among grizzy bears. He can be called an expert. But, he never witnessed a grizzly / tiger confrontation. So, we have no experts to go to here. 
 
Therefore, we look at the evidence. The evidence being the list of advantages. I showed you mine...

I am through playing with you children. I know that, even with ALL of the evidence stacked up against the Siberian tiger, you will never admit that you are wrong. 
 
It would take a grown-up to do that. Goodbye Chr1$t and the rest of you children.

Hey chr!$T 
 
 
 
Toby Ross mentioned something about about the bear being smarter how true is that?

Well Salva 
 
 
 
Toby Ross is very much incorrect for one thing no research has ever been carried out to compare the intelligence of both animals. 
 
 
 
unless he can show me one shred of scientific evidences that bears are smarter than cats (which i know he can't) 
 
then he has no argument. 
 
 
 
once again he comes and not understand the reason why i gave the accounts of tigers killing elephants 
 
 
 
his theory is that because the bear is stronger and bigger and as more stamina it can beat a tiger on a head-on match. 
 
 
 
elephants are also bigger and stronger and out smart both animal by a landslides and tigers can still beat them 
 
 
 
he believes because the bear has these he can overwhelm the tiger well the elephant also overwhelm the tiger more than any bear could, not to mention elephants have thicker skin and are smarter and yet we still have tigers beating them 
 
 
 
if he can't read a comment and understand its meaning then whats the use of trying to explain anything to him at all? 
 

and then there he goes again 
 
 
 
he said i claimed that the bear was slow because of his size and yet he has no proof of me saying that 
 
 
 
i did indeed said the bear was slow but i did not say he was slow because of his  
 
 
 
unless Toby Ross can point this out which he can't 
 
 
 
i also said the bear was only a little slow 
 
key word 'little' 
 
 
 
and then he goes and say i said the bear would stand still and yet he cannot copy past where i said this 
 
 
 
so on top of being someone who reads and not understand he also lies 
 
 
 
yes that just like him 
 
 
 
siberian tiger vs grizzly 6/10 for the bear 
 

Like I said you were wasting your time 
 
 
 
Can you give me a list of the most intelligent aniamls?

Salva 
 
 
 
well i'm not quite sure but here is what i thing 
 
 
 
hyenas  
 
dogs 
 
rats 
 
chimps 
 
elephants 
 
crows 
 
dolphins(of curse) 
 
orangutan 
 
gorillas( i guess ) 
 
pigs 
 
parrots 
 
 
 
 
 
and if Toby Ross does come back 
 
 
 
tiger advantages 
 
 
 
speed, 
 
can execute a much faster attack than any bear, 
 
knowledge of the animal(experience) 
 
ferocity 
 
tigers can jump at a vertical ht of over 12 ft, bears only stand 8 ft 
 

www.all-creatures.org/bear/b-bearintel.html  
 
tigers are not faster than a grizzly. 
 
It will not help the tiger to jump over the bears head.  
 
elephants again?????

Chr!$T 
 
 
 
Is your old gmail address still in use? 
 
 
 
Siberian Tiger vs Grizzly Bear 6/10 for the bear is my best bet.

Salva 
 
 
 
well actually birds in general are smart because more species of birds use tools more than any other animals 
 
 
 
yes its still in use TLK 
 
 
 
Toby Ross  
 
 
 
well guess who comes back after saying he was going to leave twice. lol  
 
 
 
i can show you records of real bears at hand that you would claim are a stories. 
 
 
 
so far all i have been doing is giving you the benefit of the doubt, if I was really taking you seriously you will be much dumfounded, trust me. 
 
 
 
it can't be helped that you don't understand ok 
 
 
 
and not because one man (note one man) claims (note claims) that the intelligence of a bear can be compared to chimps means anything 
 
 
 
did he carry out any actual research? 
 
 
 
and the tiger's jumping ability can sure help it in any fight not to mention that tigers are more aggressive that bears,  
 
 
 
the site says grizzly mothers show their cubs how to find food. Are you saying a mother tigress does not show her cubs how to hunt as well? 
 
 
 
and the lion story about instinct and whatever still as no explanation from you yet  
 
 
 
and my question was can you show me where it says bears out smart cats? 
 
 
 
siberian tiger vs grizzly 6/10 for the bear

As a matter of fact if any bear is more intelligent than cats that would be the black bear 
 
 
 
and a bear’s intelligence does not help it in a fight  
 
 
 
much like how a gorilla’s intelligent does not help it in a fight with a tiger 
 

Still wasting your time chr!$T 
 
 
 
Thanks 
 
 
 
Can you give me a list of birds that use tools aside from crows?

Well i know but ... 
 
 
 
About the birds 
 
 
 
here: 
 
green heron( use fishing bait) 
 
 
 
woodpecker finch ( use small twigs to reach grub in trees) 
 
 
 
Egyptian vultures( use rocks to break ostrich eggs and they drop bones from high altitude in order to reach the bone marrow)  
 
 
 
Seagulls (drop oysters to open them) 
 
 
 
I remember a bird in africa that uses the thorns on tree to hold its dinner down because the muscle in its legs are weak and they cannot use them(unless they want it to break) but I forgot the name. 
 

http://jackjacksonj.webs.com/tigerpredationonbears.htm 
 
 
 
you guys need to check this out 
 
at average size or the same size has a tiger the grizzly as no chance of a rats ass

Daniel 
 
 
 
 
 
a grizzly bear will kill a tiger most of the time in a face of 
 
 
 
6/10 for the bear

This is the scariest fight on this site so far. This is the one I wouldn't want to be in the middle of. I tend to think the bear could win, but wouldn't be surprised if I was wrong. They are both bad, bad, bad creatures; along with rhino, hippo, and elephant, as close to monsters on land as you'll find.

Damon...just type in grizzly bear and go from site to site. Here are the first 4 sites I cam to. They all agree about the grizzly size. 
 
www.defenders.org/wildlife_and_habitat/wildlife/grizzly_bear.htm 
 
www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/246460/grizzly-bear 
 
http://animals.nationalgeographic.com/animals/mammals/grizzly-bear.htm 
 
http://nhptv.org/natureworks/grizzly.htm

Some fights, such as lion vs Bengal tiger and Kodiak bear vs polar bear can go either way. But, grizzly vs tiger, in a face to face fight can only end one way. The grizzly is much more powerful. He would kill the tiger in 10 out of 10 fights.

Damon...I went to your "elite" site and found nothing more than a bullshit site which is ALL about the lion being the "King of Beasts". 
 
Look at the National Geo site and other more reliable sites. 
 
The Americn blackbear is from 300 to 650 pounds, with rare individuals being over 800 pounds. And these are smaller than a grizzly. A grizzly is a powerhouse of brute strength which can overpower the big cat every time, as easily as a wolf can kill a sheep.

You need to read more than just that single bullcrap site of false info. The record American black bear was 880 pounds, shot by an A-hole hunter. Male American black bears average from 300 to 500 pounds with 600 pound bears not uncommon. An American black bear stands from 6 feet to 7 feet tall. 
 
I consider the black bear to be an even match against a lion. I would not bet on this fight unless I were desperate for money, as it could go either way. But, if I need the cash, I would place my bet on the bear.  
 
Are you affraid to read further than elite.kudu?

OK...let's just say that a 600 pound grizzly faces a 600 pound tiger. I would say bear over tiger 9 out of 10 fights. And this is if the tiger is just really damn lucky. The same can be said for 500 pound lion meets 500 pound grizzly.

Power of predators: 
 
#1- polar bear. 
 
#2- Kodiak bear. 
 
#3- grizzly bear. 
 
#4- Siberian tiger. 
 
#5- American black bear. 
 
#6- Bengal tiger. 
 
#7- gorilla. 
 
#8- lion.  
 
#9- jaguar. 
 
#10- leopard / puma.

and i say again 
 
 
 
http://jackjacksonj.webs.com/tigerpredationonbears.htm  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
you guys need to check this out  
 
 
 
at average size or the same size has a tiger the grizzly as no chance of a rats ass

top 10 predetors on land 
 
 
 
#1 tiger, no doubt 
 
#2 Kodiak bear 
 
#3 Polar bear 
 
#4 Lion 
 
#5 grizzly bear 
 
#5 jaguar 
 
#6 Black bear 
 
#7 gorrila 
 
#8 Leopard 
 
#9 cougar 
 
#10 Spotted hyena 
 
 
 
seriously, a black bear a better predator then a bengal tiger and lion is just a big joke.

why tiger is the best predetor is because it kills anything on land you can think of, From 1000 lb + Brown bears to 7 ton elephants to 20ft saltwater crocodiles to 600 lb chinese black bear to 30 ft reticulated pythons. Nothing could take down this mighty predetor.  
 
All what a polar bear preys on is Seals and maybe a walrus when on land. compare that to the tiger ! the kodiak ussualy eats only prey on fish that are like 1 ft long. The tiger is much more aggresive and better fighters even though bears are heavier the tiger still owns all.

The grizzly which is at least 3 times more powerful than the tiger, would shake the cat like a fox terrier with a rat. A lion or a tiger would not stand a snowball's chance in an active volcano against a full grown male grizzly bear.

The big cats are the world's top predators on land. I have only the highest respect for the Siberian tiger. He is the top predator in his domain. He is a true hunter, and has been known to kill even big brown bears in well calculated ambush attacks. 
 
The grizzly and his brown bear relatives, are more scavenger / forager style animals. A grizzly bear has evolved from predator to one who simply takes his meal from the hunters ( like T-rex ).  
 
He can do this because he knows that he is the strongest animal in the land.  
 
Some brown bears simply follow tigers to take their kills. They do this regularly.  
 
This site is not about can a tiger kill a brown bear ( grizzly ). Yes, they have been known to kill female bears, sleeping bears, and ( in rare cases ) even grown males in ambush attacks. 
 
But, this site is about a face-to-face encounter. The grizzly would win 10 out of 10 fights. Easily.

http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/conflict13.html  
 
( if you dare ).

the site i gave have everything on it. 
 
 
 
it even have a male siberian tiger which was less that 500 pounds that eats brown bears all year round awake or asleep he even took on bears twice his size face to face and kick the bears ass then ate him 
 
and shit him out later 
 
tiger kills bear every time the only bear that can kill a tiger is a polar bear and thats because he is really big and nothing else 
 
tigers even have the stamina to keep up with bears in a fight  
 
can anyone here show me anything else that says otherwise? i bet not 
 
if the bear kills the tiger he just fucking lucky and the tiger is sick or injured but no brown bear can kill a healthy tiger in a face to face fight 
 
 
 
tigers kills and eats and shits out bears everytime. 
 
the bear have no chance

At lion vs black bear, Damon claims that an American grizzly is the size of a sloth bear. 5 feet tall and 300 pounds. It is obvious that Damon has never seen a full grown grizzly bear and that he reads only what he wants to believe. Not the facts.

Look, tiger reaches 675 lb, Grizzly is 750 lb. tiger is faster, more alige better fighter. Bengal tigers which are slightly smaller then siberians live together with Chinese black bears. and the bear always runs away and when it fights it loses 10 out of 10. A grizzly isn't much bigger then a black bear. 600 lb vs 750 lb. now if a bengal tiger destroys a black bear would't the siberian tiger destoy the grizzly ? And if a siberian tiger beats a russian brown bear which can get almost twice as big. It would beat the grizzly 8 out of 10 if the bear was lucky enough.

Mr animalia i think your wrong a tiger will kill the bear all the time 
 
In the site I showed there was one case where a large male brown bear came saw a tiger's tracks and ran like a dog would with his tail between his legs, if the bear knew he would win all the time he would not have run away like some scared little kid 
 
tigress can fight can kill bears in face to face fights and what i am saying is not just my opinion all of this happen 
 
tiger will kill, eat and shit out bears every time 
 

how can bears steal from tigers regularly and both animals are close to extinction 
 
if bears can steal from tigers on a regular basis then tigers can kill bears on a regular basis it would not be branded as just rare cases 
 
if bears steal from tigers all the time then tigers kill bears all the time too 
 

Daniel, I said a tiger would beat a BLACK bear every time and yes I agree. even a tigres could beat a grizzly and a male tiger would just destroy it.  
 
 
 
P.S. what the heck are you talking about toby a Grizzly is not twice as big as a tiger! Tiger: 419-675 lb and 850 lb on max while grizzly 500-750 lb and 1000 lb on max.

That hump on a grizzly's back is solid muscle. A grizzly is made for digging in concrete hard frozen ground. He has powerful arms, shoulders, and claws. He rips open stumps, turns over fallen trees, and turns over boulders in search of food. No big cat comes remotely close to a grizzly's strength. 
 
A grizzly has an incredible sense of smell. A grizzly can trail a tiger and easily take a tiger's kill. The tiger will not dare to fight the grizzly face-to-face.  
 
Big cats are built for stealth and ambush. Bears are built for a face-to-face fight. No lion and no tiger will ever beat a grizzly in a face-to-face encounter.

Daniel. The grizzly does not steal food from a tiger. He takes it by force. The tiger can only back away and allow the much more powerful bear to have the bloody feast.  
 
In the prehistoric world, T-rex lived much the same way. The T-rex trailed the raptors, which were the better hunters. Then, the rex would calmly take the kill away from the smaller, more delicate raptors.  
 
Being a scavenger, like a grizzly or a T-rex simply places him at the top of the food chain.

I am probably underestimating the grizzly when I say that the average grizzly is about 5 times stronger than any tiger.

Toby, Seriously a grizzly is not even close to 5 times as strong, in fact a tiger can get just as big as a grizzly, And if it came down to pure strenght the tiger is stronger. the bear is SLIGHLY heavier but most of it weight comes from heavy sceletons and lost of fat. tigers don't have as much fat and smaller sceleton, there weight comes from there huge muscles. 
 
68% of the people voted the tiger to be the winner, the creator of this battle made the tiger the winner. Now youre trying to tell all of us that the grizzly would beat the tiger every time? THATS JUST HILARIOUS

Animalia...tigers are built for stealth and ambush. A tiger has claws designed to hold onto the prey while it grips the animals throat to strangle it.  
 
A grizzly is built purely for power. That hump on it's shoulders is pure muscle. It digs in frozen ground that is as hard as concrete. It rips open stumps, turns over fallen trees, and overturns boulders looking for food. 
 
Before Euro-Americans slaugtered most of the American bison, as well as the grizzly bears, Grizzlys used to hunt bison. A grizzly can slap a bison just one time and break it's neck. If a tiger hit a bison, he could do no more than make the bison angry. 
 
Grizzlys are built for power while tigers are built for stealth. The tiger is a better hunter. The grizzly is stronger. That is why some brown bears trail tigers to take their kills.  
 
Face to face, the tiger will back down from the grizzly and allow the bear to have it's kill. But, if the tiger does try to defend it's meal, the grizzly will kill the big cat, perhaps with a single hit.

toby, no you are wrong. A grizzly is NOT like a kodiak or a russian bear. They are smaller and weaker. A bear could never kill a tiger in one slap considering the tiger is the same size. And a tiger would NEVER back down from his prey. the grizzly would aviod the tiger just like the black bear. besides, 5-8% of the tigers diet is brown bears. and with the grizzly only being half the size of the russian brown bear, the tiger will easily rip the grizzly apart.

Smaller and weaker? You and Damon seem to think that a grizzly is the size of a sun bear. Grizzly's are bigger than American black bears. Black bears range from 300 to 600 pounds. 700 pound black bears are not rare. The record black bear was 880 pounds, shot by a hunter. 
 
 
 
Any bear that can break the neck of a bison, is more than strong enough to kill a tiger. 
 
Tigers kill bears only by stealth and ambush. In a face-off, the grizzly will win every time. 
 
To say that a tiger is stronger than a grizzly is just pure ignorance. You have done absolutely no research. If lions and tigers were as strong as bears, they would not need retractable claws and would not resort to killing by strangulation. A grizzly usually kills with a single hit.

Toby i showed a link with records of tigers killing and eating and shiting out brown bears 
 
when the tigers kill its both by ambush and face to face attack what you have a reading problem? 
 
a tigress even woke up a mother bear and harass the bear  
 
the bear stayed in the cave and let the tigress drag her sorry ass out killed,eat and then shit her out 
 
as a bear ever did that to a tiger? 
 
if it as show me 
 
bears even see tiger tracks and run away or try to climb trees 
 
tiger kill bears every time 
 
like i said this happened in real life its not just my imagination like it is yours 
 
if bears steal from tigers then tigers kill bears 
 
it that simple you know 
 
there is even a record of a lion killing a grizzly bear 
 
if a lion can do it a tiger can too

Daniel, stop reading comic books and go to:  
 
http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/conflict13.html

I am being honest about this. You are making up stories. Tigers kill bears by ambush, and sometimes while the bear is in hibernation. Even a much smaller and toothless sloth bear can chase off a tiger in a face to face encounter. Against a grizzly, the tiger stands no chance what-so-ever.  
 
You seem to forget, the tiger is just a big cat. Did you know that, a stronger pit bull terrier can kill a common housecat?

Toby, I give you 6 reasons for why a tiger would win. 
 
1-yes a grizzly is bigger then a sloth bear, but its nothing compared to a russian brown bear. 
 
Russian bears: 900-1500 lb 
 
Grizzly bear: 500-750 lb and RARLY 1000 lb 
 
2- russian brown bears make up 5-8% of the tigers diet, tearing a grizzly will be easier 
 
3-daniel showed you records of tigers killing brown bears 
 
4-if a tigress can beat the living crap out of a black bear I think a male tiger can do the same to a grizzly. 
 
5- go on youtube and find "mother cougar vs grizzly bear". so if that bear runs away from a 100 lb cougar imagine what a 700 lb tiger could do to it! 
 
6- tigers have experience fighting brown bears while grizzly bears never battled a cat this big. 
 
 
 
give up, you lost

http://jackjacksonj.webs.com/tigerpredationonbears.htm  
 
 
 
well toby you r the 1 making up story like Mr Animaila said i have records have tigers killing eating and shiting out bears 
 
someone else even posted a record of a lion beating the hell out of a grizzly bear 
 
toby if i showed you records and you say im telling a story then i guess that makes you some one with a reading problem or just a liar like that other person said 
 
i even visited the lion black bear blog  
 
and even the person who agreed with you is telling you to re-read his comments 
 
thats just down right stupid of you 
 
to have so many persons telling you the same thing to re-read come on 
 
can you show me more that 5 records of brown bears killing tigers? 
 
i bet not but i already showed you more than 15 records of tigers and tigress killing and eating brown bears 
 
even large male brown bears runing from tiger's track 
 
what do you have?

A grizzly is built like a tank. Rock-hard muscle. A tiger is slinky. A 700 pound grizzy would so easily kill a 600 pound tiger. 700 pounds is a large grizzly, but some are much bigger. 600 pounds is a large tiger too. At these sizes, the grizzly is at least 5 times more powerful than the tiger which is built slimmer for speed and stealth. But, even with his bulk, the bear is just as fast. 
 
A grizzly could run down a tiger, catch him, and kill him.  
 
Without the element of surprize, the tiger has no chance of winning. He is an ambush killer. The grizzly however, is used to a head to head fight. That, besides his weight and strength, is a big advantage.

Toby ross 
 
a tiger is just a big cat. sure, a tiger is just a big cat that kils crocodiles, elephants, AND BEARS. you just dont get it do you? a tiger will beat a grizzly 9 out of 10 at least! its fast, stong, and superior fighter. A kodiak bear would be more of a challenge for a tiger but this fight is just like lion vs black bear, the cat will win all the time. Seriously, you really overestimate the grizzly. it may be 1.2-1.5 times stonger then te tiger, no more! and only because of it's heavy sceletons and more bodyfat it's slightly heavier. the tiger is still longer. if a tiger takes down animals like elephants, what kind of chance does a grizzly stand? 
 
 
 
BTW: you still haven't replied on the fact that a grizzly is alot smaller then the russian brown bear and that those brown bears makes up 5-8% of there diet.

In Old California, when owned by Spain, they had regular arena games, similar to ancient Greece, but only fighting animal against animal. The records of these fights are still in California. I read the book that showed the details of every fight. 
 
They had a Mexican grizzly who killed everything imported intro California for the games. This included both lions and tigers. 
 
I found a little info online at: 
 
http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/conflict13.html 
 
BUT, anyone with even a spark of common since can look at both animals and know that, if the tiger has a brain, he will hide.

YES I DID answer that animal. The word is AMBUSH. A tiger sneaks up from behind the bear and attacks unexpectedly. But, this site is about a face to face encounter where the tiger does not stand a chance.  
 
The grizzly is used to frontal attacks. 
 
 
 
The grizzly is roughly 5 times stronger than the cat. 
 
In the average sized animals, the grizzly is bigger and heavier. 
 
The grizzly has stamina. 
 
Regardless of what some have said here, grizzly bears are not slow nor clumsy. A grizzly is as fast as a tiger.

Wow  
 
I see more people here much of late 
 
Mr Animalia you are wasting your time and there is a very high chance of him not answering your question. 
 
Look at how many questions Chr!$T asked and they have yet to be answered 
 
Toby is living in a fantasy world, 
 
Daniel nice set of records but even you are wasting your time. 
 
You even showed a record of a large male brown bear fleeing from a tiger's tracks,TRACKS not even the tiger itself and he(Toby) says a grizzly will run down a tiger or the tiger will hide 
 
it would be the other way around  
 
lol pathetic 
 
And those pit fight do not give the details of the animals health

The records i showed most of which took place in the wild not in a manmade pitt fight but 
 
there is even a pitt fight there where the tiger kick the hell out of the bear and the owners have to save the bear and pull his sorry ass out of the cage to save his life 
 
the tiger like always kills and eats and shits out the bear every time 
 
the bear as no chance  
 
 
 
i figure as much Salva

Toby 
 
A tiger slim? what are you talking about a tiger is jacked with muscle! steel muscle! Tigers are much more muscular then bears, bears look bulkier because of there heavy sceletons and more bodyfat. tigers are faster, more muscular, and better fighters. the bear is a fat and a bit heavier. and cats are stronger then bears when they're the same size. 
 
tiger vs grizzly is like a fight between a muscular and fat guy almost the same size, and with the muscle guy being faster and better fighter he will always win.

Let's put this into perspective. 
 
Out west, not so many years back, cattle were being killed by wolves, cougars, and grizzly bears.  
 
The wolves hunt in packs. They simply tore a cow to pieces. The cougar hunts by stealth and ambush. He sneaks up behind the cow, then holds on with his sharp retractible claws, and strangles the cow with his jaws around the cows neck. This takes from 10 to 30 minutes. A grizzly walks up to the cow or bull, and hits it in the head with one paw. The cow then has either a broken neck, a crushed skull, or both. One hit and it's over. 
 
IF the tiger was as strong as a grizzly, he would not spend all that time strangling a deer or a cow. He would simply hit it.

The wolves are like a gang of teenage punks, ganging up on one. 
 
The cougar ( or tiger ) is like a thief who sneaks up behind someone and slices his or her throat. 
 
The grizzly just walks up boldly ( like a real man ) and hits his opponent in the face.

In all honesty, and I am totally serious, anyone who thinks a cat is stronger than a grizzly is an idiot. 
 
AND what difference does it make if bears in Asia are bigger than bears in America, although I believe you are full of buffalo crap. It makes no difference. And Christ asked ignorant questions.

Tigers don't sneak up on ther prey. they sneak till they com in 30 feet of there prey. then they jump up the bull sees them and runs away. the tiger runs behind the bull then jumps on its back, takes it down and bites it neck. 
 
and what are you talking about? a bear killing a bull in one slap is like trying to kill a whale with a knife, its impossible. I'll believe you if you post a video of that happening.now go search Tiger vs bear on youtube and on every video the bear gets powned 
 
the largest animal a grizzly bear takes down is a moosse(1 ton), the largest a tiger takes down is an elephant(7 ton)

Mr.Animalia,First of all if elephants coexisted with grizzlies, you would hear of grizzlies killing elephants. Second,if a 700 lb tiger jumped on a grizzly it would only be due to hybernation.A tiger wouldnt be so stupid to try and confront a grizzly; ok in this instance for debate puposes i guess the tiger is stupid and a mock battle would last only until the grizzly swatted the tiger with the strongest and largest claws of all carnavoirs and turns the tiger into kitty litter ok?

Go blue, you really think a grizzly will scare off a tiger? seriously, Tigers and russian brown bears share the same terretory, and they make up 5-8% of there diet. Now considering a Russian brown bear is on average 1000 lb, a grizzly on average is 600 lb. you really think a grizzly will kill a tiger if the russian bear isn't able of doing that? 
 
tiger are muscle! SOLID MUSCLE. bears are fussy fat and heavy sceletons that make them look big, nothing else. 
 
there is no way a grizzly can take down a tiger in one slap. NO WAY and a grizzly killing an elephant? I wannee see that happenig! 
 
if tou still dont believe me: one picture is worth a 1000 words, go on youtube and type 'bear vs tiger'. every video you find the bear gets powned. Now if you still dont believe me go on all the records daniel has on the comments page. 
 
i'll tell you how the fight would go like. the bear has its prey, a tiger commes in and roares. the bear runnes away. IF the bear was dumb enough to fight. it would lose, as fast as lightning the tiger would jump on the bears back, take it down and deliver it a fatal bite and its bye bye teddy. 
 
 
 
and "go blue" , you are toby ross right?

Grizzly surely has the upper hand in this fight.It is well armed,stronger,intellegent and protected by thick fur.The Siberian Tiger's best chance of winning a 1700 pound Grizzly is to use it's speed to stay out of the Grizzly's reach and attack from behind.But the Grizzly will win the fight 6/10 times.

Mr. Animalia. Let me put it in a much more basic understanding.Its like driving a mustang head on into a fully loaded semi.The mustang being the siberian tiger and the the semi= the grizzly that the tiger was stupid enough to confront. Hell I could kill a tiger if it was sleeping.Show me a video of a tiger killing a grizzly and not the multiple referenced overly biased drunk on vodka wantabe Nat Geo film producers version of wild kingdom.It wont happen.And no I am Not Toby

aravindlal, There are no 1700 lb grizzly bears, some 1000 lb ones, but no 1700 lb.tigers are more aggresive, better fighters, much faster, and can get almost as big as grizzly bears + there body has more muscle 
 
and go blue look on top of the page, there is a video of a siberian tiger killing a adult brown bear, considering russian brown bears are bigger then grizzly bear, the tiger will EASY kill your grizzly

Mr.Animalia.I viewed the video of the tigers eating a stag and the one killing a sloth bear and all of the other cute kitty features. Where is your video proof of a siberian tiger killing a FULL GROWN Grizzly? You have been Duped by the U Tube nation!

tiger has more muscle than grizzly. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha THAT IS SO FUNNY ha ha ha ha ha ha SO REDICULOUS! ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha THE IDIOT! ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

toby ross, you dont get it do you? for the last time, the only reasons bears are heavier is because of there big sceleton and large bodyfat. big cats have a small sceleton and low bodyfat, there weight comes from there huge muscles. If a tiger wasn't muscular how do you think it takes down elephants? magic? Now dont come and tell me they kill by stealth, it still takes lots of power and speed to take down a 7 tonner like that. Now when you told me that a grizzly could take down an elephant as well, that was the joke of the century. 
 
And go blue, sloth bear? what are you talking about? that is a russian brown bear. Nearly twice the size of an average grizzly.

Mr Animalia, please! The tiger in your supposed video is larger than the bear. Take off your 3d glasses and come down to earth.Let me break it down for you.There is no video proof that a siberian tiger killing a full grown grizzly.You can chatter all you want praising the so called Russsian bears are bigger than the american grizzlies when in fact id you compare what the tiger is eating or killing to a picture of an adult Ruskie brown bear its apples and oranges my friend.There is no known carnavoir with the exception of maybe a polar bear that could defeat an FULL GROWN ADULT GRIZZLY not the little cubs shown on the "Lets Kill a Bear Show" you claim. Wipe your glasses and take a deep breath and re watch your creature features.And stop using the reference "Russian Bears" are twice as big as American bears. Sounds too communist!DA!DA!

One more thing Mr. Animalia just what the hell is "sceleton"? Cant spell and cant see.MMMMMM makes me wonder.Toby has done his research now do yours!

Dear mr go blue, its PROVEN that brown bears make up 5-8% of tigers diet. But they dont hunt and kill bears over 1000 lb, now my point is that grizzly bears very rarly get 1000 lb. 
 
Now i'll give you a list of carnavoirs that could beat a grizzly: 
 
Siberian tiger, MAYBE lion,polar bear, kodiak bear, bengal tiger, russian bear, rhino, elephant, hippo, LARGE jaguar and even a group of hyenas or wolves

Go blue, one more thing: there is no doubt that you are toby ross under a different name trying to make us think that someone else here supports the bear. 
 
And before you type anything, LOOK AT THE POLL RESULTS 67% vs 33%

Mr. Animalia, I am not denying that tigers dont eat the small bear happy meals.Please expain to all our readers how a rhino and an elephant is a carnavoir. Let me give you a list of carnavoirs that would kill a Full Grown Male Siberian Tiger: A Full Grown Grizzly,Any Kodiak and a Polar Bear

Mr. Animalia, I am not Toby Ross.Let me repeat my self I am not Toby Ross.Are you Chr!$T? or Daniel? Why am I supposed to look at the polls and be convinced. It is just a popular vote with speculation and very little foresight.

Listen you ignorant son of a female dog named Animilia! First of all, I never said or even hinted that bears hunt elephants. That is strictly your fairy tail about those cats you worship. And, I am not Go Blue! 
 
You can find me at: Toby Ross or Og-Lee at myspace. 
 
Go Blue has done his homework and also has that rare thing called common sense.  
 
Anyone with an ounce of good sense knows that a bear has heavier bones to hold a heavier muscle mass. A grizzly bear is at least 5 times stronger that a mere tiger. 
 
Do your homework Animilia.

first of all, go blue and toby ross. If you call the bears that the tiger killed small, that also means that you call grizzly bear small. those bears that the tiger killed are 600-1000 lb, thats as big if not bigger then a grizzly bears. bears are a part of the tigers diet, dont you just get it? now dont com and say those bears are small. 800 lb is big, bigger then 80% of the bear species today. Now you still havent replied on all the records that daniel has?  
 
So if a bear is 5 times stronger then a tiger and a tiger can take down an elephant you are telling me that 1 grizzly would beat 5 elepants? a grizzly would run from one elephant. 
 
seiously, I even saw a video of a FEMALE COUGAR scaring away a large grizzly to protect her cubs, go on youtube and type: Mother cougar vs grizzly bear

I'll put this short and simple for you bear fans to understand 
 
Tiger kills female russian bears. 
 
female russian beer is as big as a male grizzly bear. grizzly bear vs tiger will have the same outcome as female russian bear vs tiger: THE TIGER WILL ALWAYS WIN 
 
and what about all of daniels records, you havent replied on them jet? still busy making up something?

bla bla bla bla bla TABBY bla bla bla bla bla bla TIGGER bla bla bla bla bla THEY'RE GRRRREAT bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla And regardless of all of your talk talk talk, a grizzly can so easily kill a tiger in a face-to-face fight. Tigers only kill by ambush.  
 
 
 
Grizzly bears are not jumpers and they are not ambush predators. A grizzy goes face-to-face with his aversary. Show us a video of a tiger killing an elephant.  
 
But, even if he can, what the HELL does this have to do with this face-off. NO AMBUSH ALLOWED HERE. 
 
Oh yeah, tigers never fight like that.

toby ross, I am more then happy to show you a video about what you asked for. 
 
go to youtube and type TIGER VS BEAR,LION,CROCODILE AND ELEPHANT.you'll see a tiger killing and elephant. now ones you watch this you will understand that the tiger is the most fearless predetor. 
 
 
 
and did you watch mother "cougar vs grizzly bear" jet? youre big bad grizzly got powned by a female cougar.

How do you reply to Daniel's records when he finshes his argument with "rats ass" or "shits bears" That certainly didnt come from the Nat Geo Field guid for Dummies.Maybe it did! Yes it did under the chapter Ultimate Fiction.

Mr Animalia please spell check before you send us literates any more information on "tigurs pouned bares"

man a tiger would win u see how big the tigers k9s is

Go Blue those records are real not just some stories made up by a tiger fan  
 
unless of course you are saying the Author of the book lied 
 
and why my sentences include the words shit and bears  
 
is because tigers ,kill ,eat and shit out bears every time 
 
you want to know how they found out about the numerous amount of bears that were brutally killed 
 
they followed the tiger's 'scat' in other words the tiger's shit 
 
and to say tigers kill bear only smaller that them self is just showing how ignorant you are 
 
the same male tiger which was under 500 pounds that they were tracking by using his scat(shit) was a bear killer 
 
he ate bears all year round 
 
he even attacked bears up to twice his size 
 
If you ask me i think this tiger was evil because there was no shortage of a tiger's normal plain item there was plenty of deer and wild boars to go around but yet when they finally caught up with they were following a trail of 8 separate bear kills 
 
7 of which said to be killed with little effort but the 8th one showed signs of a vicious fight and the tiger still won 
 
you can call it a story of a fairytale all you want but i showed actual evidence 
 
and to say tigers are scared of bears when the bears flee from the tiger TRACKS and not the tiger itself shows just how stupid some of you really are  
 
bears run form tigers tracks lol 
 
 
 
and still no reply 
 
i wonder y? 
 
tiger kills bears everytime 
 

The claim that a grizzly bear is five times stronger than a tiger as yet to be proven 
 
Can you show me facts Toby just as I showed you my records? 
 
as much as i hate to back track to that show animal planet used to bring 
 
Name: Most Extreme they did an episode once on the top 10 strongest animals and in the show the animals are given ranks 
 
the lower the rank of the animal the more extreme it is compared to a human the Brown bear was ranked 10th place while the gorilla was given a rank of 8th and the tiger was said to be the 4th strongest animal in the count down 
 
i know its not data and i doubt they did any actual research but if animal planet said so how wrong can they be? 
 
 
 
tiger kill, eats and shits out bear every time 
 
and when tigers fight they fight on there hunches and use both there paws much like a bear would 
 

I'm just curious but can anyone here give me the actual weight range of each animal? 
 
And give the specific year these animals were measured and maybe the age group of these aniamls measured. 
 
Siberian tiger ? 
 
Grizzly bear ? 
 

Well Daniel tigers fight in two/three different styles. 
 
From what I have seen in tigers vs. tigers fights and even some tigers vs. lions fight some do in fact stand up like bears and swipe with there paws but others fight low to the ground much like a dog and even roll on their backs to get a better grip of their adversaries. 
 
 
 
I believe it is the individual animal that determines how a tiger would decide to fight. 
 

The tiger must stalk his quarry very quietly. He must get really close, before he springs onto the animal. This is because, like all cats, a tiger tires easily. 
 
The tiger holds onto the victim desperately with very sharp retractible claws. The tiger grips the animals throat and strangles his victim to death. This might take 10 minutes, 30 minutes, or even longer. 
 
The tiger's killing weapon is his jaws. Never-the-less, a grizzly has much stronger jaws. The bear's killing weapon is basically his brute strength. A grizzly hits the animal with a single swipe of one paw, and shatters bone. I have read accounts, from a variety of sources, about how a grizzly can break the neck of a bison or a bull with just one hit. 
 
If a tiger was even close in strength to a grizzly, he would not spend such a long time in killing a herbivore.

For all of you crybabies who keep hollering, "wrong bear, Kodiak, Asian brown, coastal bear, bla bla bla bla bla bla". If a grizzly will breed with a polar bear, don't you think that it is only reasonable that any/all brown bears breed with each other regularly?  
 
 
 
So, stop crying about what species of brown bear we are talking about. We don't care what kind of tiger you toss into the fray.  
 
It really doesn't matter. The bear is going to kill the tiger with a single hit anyway.

Yeah yeah what ever it dont matter what type of brown bear either tiger still kills, eats and shits out bear everytime 
 
lions can even kill bears lol

Daniel says shit shit shit shit shit shit shit shit and must have a mouth full. 
 
That is the sign of someone who knows that he is wrong and cannot think of anything intelligent to say. 
 
A sign of immaturity.  
 
So Daniel...why does a tiger kill by slow strangulation? Why is he unable to make a quick kill like a grizzly?

Wow toby you are taking this fight way to seriously  
 
but just as you say my mouth is full of shit i won't really comment on that for it is just showing how immature you really are. 
 
how did they find out tigers eta bears by finding bear remines in it 
 
can you understand why i use shit because you seem to have no idea of what scat is 
 
you want a description of the fight go and check the lion kills bear record or the tiger kills bear record 
 
both of which were made to fight in a cage so no ambush could take place 
 
but seriously you are taking this animal fight way too seriously 
 

In other words, you cannot explain why the tiger must kill by strangulation.  
 
As for pit fights, I will not support such a thing by visiting those sites. The people who conduct such fights should be tossed in with both animals.  
 
*tigers hunt and kill tigers. Usually females, cubs, or juveniles. This is always an ambush attack. 
 
A grown male brown bear will trail a tiger, just to take way it's dinner. In a face-off, it is the tiger who backs down.

http://www.jstor.org/pss/3872615?cookieSet=1 
 
Zeroman here are the sizes of adult male/female grizzlies and the year in which they were weighted. 
 
 
 
Toby you not going to those site will just never let you know what’s on them 
 
y should I reproduce something that is already said 
 
and once again observers you collared and weight brown bears all noticed that male brown bears will avoid male tigers and seek out the female tigers or the younger tigers to steal from and these are real observations. 
 
BTW bears that come across tiger's track have said to turn around and change their direction  
 
this as even been observed in large male adult bears fleeing from tiger track 
 
can you explain to me why a large male adult bear would flee from the tiger's track? 
 
the bear was healthy and the fact that he is large gives away that he was bigger than the average brown bear but he still fled from the tracks and not the tiger itself 
 
since you know so much then you can give an explanation right? 
 

I liked the example you gave me a few days ago,toby. but now I use it against you 
 
Average leopard vs average man 
 
eve though an average man is heavier ans stronger, the leopard will still rip the man's head of and will easily win, why? because big cats are made to kill animals bigger and strong then themself. I mean, look at a tigers diet; most of its prey is bigger and strong: brown bear, Buffalo, Rhino, elephant... and even crocodile. 
 
I dont care if the bear is 3 times as strong (even though its surely not).the tiger will still kill it.

If the main mode of killing for a tiger is strangulation explain just how a tiger can open its jaws wide enough to strangle a grizzly.I dont see it happening.Most of the so called scat,shit is from smaller bears not a full grown male griz.

So go blue are you saying that a bear twice the size of a tiger is not fully grown or even just a really large bear?

My question still remains unanswered. Why must a tiger resort to killing by stealth, ambush, and slow strangulation? 
 
Why can a tiger not just slap a deer or a cow in the head and break it's neck? 
 
Hmmmm...could it be that a tiger lacks the muscle?

Daneil,I did not state anything out of context.What dont you understand about my statement?I know you wil return with a tiger that was twice as small as a full grown grizzly, killed it and ate it and scat all over. Am I right?

But Go blue records are there to say it as not happen when it as is like saying 9/11 was just a nightmare 
 
not only did they find the tiger's scat but they came across 8 separate bear kills made by the same tiger 
 
a tigress even killed a mother bear in a face to face encounter, in the presence of the tigress the mother bear stayed in her den with her two cubs  
 
A tiger as to ambush it prey because no animal will ever be stupid enough to stand still and let a tiger come up to and slap it. 
 
And what do you mean a tiger lacks the muscle about 50% of a tiger’s entire body mass is muscle but a bears muscle mass can range from 40-55% 
 
And if you did not notice both animals are built very different from each other 
 
have you seen animal face of a single blow form a tiger can cripple a 200-400 pound deer. 
 
and tigers also ambush because all of its prey items including bears can out run them 
 
and no aniaml would just stand up and not try to defend itself in the presence of a bear 
 
Toby you make it seem that the moose killed by the bear was justing sitting there and not doing anything 
 
I'm pretty sure that anyone could have figured that out 
 
now about the bears fleeing form the tiger's track lol  
 
or why male bears prefer to steal from the young tigers or female tigers and avoid the males? 
 
 
 

Those are good records thanks Daniel 
 
Well Toby Ross your single hit theory is lacking. 
 
Now don’t get me wrong for I do not favor the tiger over the bear nor do I favor the bear over the tiger. I’m just trying to understand how you guys view the fight.  
 
It is said that a single blow from a grizzly to the head or back of a moose (380–720 kg) or bison (410 - 1,000 kg) can kill it but it is also said that a single blow form a tiger to a gaur (1000kg-1500kg) is more than enough to cause serious damage to the animal. How true are these statements no can tell grizzlies prefer to hunt the calf of bison that the adults while tigers will usually kill animals weighting less than 200 kg. I’m not saying that a bear cannot kill a moose or a bison with one blow or that a tiger cannot injure gaur with a single blow but these cases are so rare.  
 
Reason there are by far more interaction with humans and grizzlies than you have with siberian tigers and humans 
 
Checking back at person that are killed by grizzlies you will find that no person died from a single blow no matter where the grizzly had hit its human victim. Most people die after being maul to death by the animal. 
 
In a fight with the tiger if the bear can manage to get a good strong blow at the tigers back or even his head then his chances of being victorious is very high. But this factor is actually dependant and how the tiger decides to fight. As in my previous comment tigers have two/three fighting styles a bear as two but usually relies on one. 
 
After well ‘doing my homework’ as most of you put it I am quite surprised of what is here, most of which is just someone defending his/her opinion with little or no evidence. 
 
More than 80% of a grizzly’s charges are bluff and almost very time the bear charges it turns its back to its opponent as seen in a case with a bear is trying to scare off a dog. The bear lowers his head and his ears are flat atop its head, in a way showing that the bear as no intention of wasting its energy on actually killing the dog. Another way is the bears ability to stand on it hind legs and appears to be bigger this is also another form of intimidation and it usually works but it can also be a flawed error when facing a tiger or even a lion for that matter. 
 
Now the bears fighting style is typically to stand on its hind legs and swing its paws like clubs, if the tiger chooses to fight like this also on his hind legs then he is surely died. But the bears fighting style isn’t all that secure when he stands he is reveling his underside to the tiger and if the tiger decides to fight low to the ground it can cause a great deal amount of damage to the bear, if the tiger gets hold of the stomach with its claws and jaws it can even rip the bears stomach open much like the record of the tiger choosing to attack the lion’s hide legs instead of the lion’s neck. And while the lion was immobilized the tiger proceeded to rip his stomach open.  
 

Ursus Arctos vs Panthera Tigris... 
 
First of all Daniel, boar grizzly bears fear no beast. That is a fairy tale you are telling. Male brown bears take food away from male tigers.  
 
Grizzly bears range from 500 to 1000 pounds. That makes a 750 pound grizzly an averaged sized male. That is the weight of the biggest Siberian tigers. A good average for your tiger is 550 pounds.  
 
Your cat would find himself helplessly overmatched.  
 

Zeroman...when the tiger goes for the grizzly's belly, the tiger is in easy reach of those powerful arms. One good swat...like killing a fly. The tiger is dead.  
 
( i will not stoop to talking about bear shit ).

Wow Toby 
 
I provided real data and you are saying i made up a story LOL 
 
you give the size of bears  
 
can you tell me what year were those imaginary bears of your were measuered 
 
just i gave the year?  
 
can you give me the age group just as i had provide for you 
 
can you tell me where these bears were measruere just as how i gave you real data and evidence? 
 
i bet not 
 
real observers as seen that male bears prefer to steal form young tigers or just the females 
 
large male bears also run from tigers track 
 
i gave you the records what have you given? 
 
i made my piont with real data but you have yet to show me anything that isn't just an estimation 
 
 
 
Zeroman you are welcome and as much as i do not agree with you i like the fact of how you explained how each aniamls fight:)

still no response yet lol 
 
I wonder why lol 
 
tell me toby where did you get those size form lol

National Geo / Wikipedia / and just about every site you can find when looking for grizzly info Mr. Daniel. Just look. The size of grizzlys is no secrete. Why do you ask? 
 
Besides, a 600 pound grizzly could esily kill a 600 pound tiger.

k Toby Nat. Geo. compares a maneless lion to a human and a tiger 
 
But Nat.Geo. was wrong for they made the tiger taller than the lion 
 
A lion is 4 ft at the shoulders 
 
while a tiger is only 3 ft  
 
how can they put the tiger as being taller than the lion when the tiger is clearly shorter 
 
If Nat.Geo. messes that up then only God knows what else they messed up 
 
And wikipedia oh give me a break 
 
any one can edit wikipedia, the only real thing that can stop anyone from writing anything at that place is lack of access to the net. 
 
If Animal Planet claims that the tiger is the 4th strongest animal amd that brown bears are only the 10 th then animal planet is also wrong. 
 
Most site just give the estimates of these animals  
 
here i will give you a link of just how wrong human estimates can be even though the site does not give any specific age group or what year the bears size was determined. 
 
BUT i will say i find this site inaccurate for it claims that siberian tigers can reach 13 ft in lt when tigers rarely pass the 11 ft mark 
 
 
 
http://www.bowhunting.net/bearhunting.net/bear2.html 
 
 
 
where in the second paragraph people originally thought black bears could be as large as 4000 pounds but just like most sites these where just very wrong esitimates 
 
 
 
if you want i can give you a description of a fight between a polar bear and a lion at the same size(600lbs) where the lion kills the polar bear BUT i will say a polar bear which is of the same size as a lion is either a sub-adult or an underfed bear and the lion was really big for most male lions only average 420 pounds(190kg) upwards to 209 kg 
 
 
 
go ahead and call it a story if you want 
 
 
 
And still you cannot give me anys ite of the bears size and the age,year and where the size of the bear was taken which i have given. 
 

Toby Ross & Go Blue 
 
if you tell me a grizzly can easy beat a tiger its size. read this: Tigers hunt on bears up to 1.7 times there size, why isn't it the other way around? all the things you 2 have been telling us here are false (tiger would run away;grizzly is at least 3 times as strong;bears are more muscle;ect...) a grizzly thats only 1.2 times as big as a tiger will EASILY get beat up, sinds the FACT that tigers hunt on brown bears 1.7 times there size. 
 
any other things you made up?

Mr. Animal;Animalia,You make it seem like shooting fish in a barrel.I asked for video proof and all of your references and I am not the least convinced. So let me get this straight. Bears are a primary food source for tigers.Right? Drive through Griz McNuggets? I dont think so. Your proof is more of an anomolie rather than common mother nature. Hang your hat on the super freak of a tiger that killed multiple bears and scat all over Russia.Stop with the paper proof and show me and Toby video proof of a 500 lb tiger killing a 650 lb male Grizzly.Im sorry, Griz McNuggets aren't served here.Only in fairy tails and Nat Geo's rendition of the Si-Fi channel does your reality exist.I was in Alaska and heard and read of reports of a grizzly decapatating a Bull Moose with one swipe of its paw.Pretty spooky! Mr. Animal,Animalia. Scare the scat right out of your kitties.Fear the Bear!Fear the Bear!

And once again Go Blue is right on the money. Absolutely correct. In fact, a 600 pound grizzly bear will crush the skull of the tiger as he breaks the 600 big cats neck.

Ok, let's try for a little reality check. 
 
Siberian Tigers, on average, will weigh in between 500-600lbs. Exceptionally large cats have checked in at 700+, and there have been reports, NOT verified, of one or two reaching upwards of 800lbs. These are NOT your average sized Siberian Tigers. 
 
 
 
Grizzly Bears will weigh in, on average, between 600-700 lbs, with exceptionally large males coming in at 800lbs+, and DOCUMENTED cases of a few coming in at 1,000lbs or more. 
 
Grizzlies DO NOT climb trees. They are too heavy, same with Siberian Tigers. Grizzlies prey on a wide varaiety of animals, including Moose, Elk, Mule Deer and even Black Bears, who can and often do, climb trees to escape from Grizzlies. Grizzlies can, for a short burst, outrun a horse, when chasing down prey. Yes, they also scavenge, and will take food away from Wolves, Cougars, Wolverines and Tigers.  
 
The Polar Bear is the largest land predator known to man, followed closely by the Kodiak Brown Bear, with the Grizzly next. The Grizzley is an omnivore, it will eat almost anything it can find. The Tiger, like all cats, is a "meat only" predator.  
 
It is extremely unlikely that a healthy, full-grown male Tiger, will go head to head with a healthy, full-grown Grizzly. 
 
The Bear is just too strong, too powerfull. He's just as fast as the Tiger and no animal can match it in ferocity. 
 
The Siberian Tiger is my all-time favorite animal, there is, in my opinion, no finer predator, but the Grizzly is just too much for the Tiger to handle, going head to head.

JCOL did his homework. He researched. JCOL is absolutely correct. 
 
Ursus Arctos vs Panthera Tigris. The grizzly, and any bear who carries the name Ursus Arctos, will go face-to-face with any tiger of the same age, same sex, and same weight, and win.

And let's clear something else up too, as far as Tigers "hunting" Brown Bears; Large Males usually have nothing to fear from Tigers during the Summer months. Tigers have been known, however, to attack Brown Bears in thier dens during the Winter months, one can only assume while the Bear is hibernating, or close to it. Seems to me it is just smart and opportunistic of the Tiger, to catch the Bear at that time. 
 
It is a safe bet that of the figures being thrown around, 5-9% of "Bears making up the Tiger's diet", a good percentage of that is of Bears who simply cannot fight back. 
 
As to how the animals fight, Tigers do indeed have sveral different ways to fight, but there is some misconception about how the Grizzly fights. Grizzly's do stand on thier hind legs at times, but this is mostly just "jousting", a test of strength between the males, or posturing, trying to show the other Bear how "big" he is. When two Grizzly's DO fight, it's a terrible sight to behold. They come straight at you with some of the biggest and strongest canines and claws in the animal kingdom, backed up by 750lbs of muscle and rage. If anyone thinks the Grizzly is just "fluffy fat", they really have no clue as to just how powerful the bear really is. I don't know from whatever the Animal planet says about the strength of a given animal, perhaps they mean the "relative" strength of said animal, in which case, insects would take the crown.

toby ross, go blue and jcol watch this and then comment, and specially toby who was trying to tell us here that tigers arent that strong!  
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ck7c2K-I44E&annotation_id=annotation_278544&feature=iv  
 
one blow of a tiger can knock out the biggest brown bears, its force is over 3 tons !

A quick aside to Mr. Animalia, or whatever your name is; 
 
A polar Bear will, on occasion, kill an adult walrus. It doesn't happen often. The Walrus can weigh in at over 4,000lbs and are infamous for it's nasty temper. You don't want to mess with one. The Kodiak Brown Bear hunts far more than just fish, I'm guessing you know that and you're just being silly. 
 
Now, let's talk about Tigers and Elephants. 
 
Tigers do NOT hunt Elephants. They WILL try to kill a baby elephant once in awhile, and there has been a rare killing of an adult Elephant, but it IS very rare. It is just too risky for the Tiger to include Elephant in it's diet. Everything has to break just right for the Tiger to make a kill like that, and you can probably count on one hand the number of times it's happened. 
 
It has no bearing, however, in our match-up between the Cat and the Grizzly.

I have no doubt of the strength of the Tiger, but I think we're talking relative to size here. 
 
Pound for pound, the Tiger may indeed be stronger. 
 
The problem for the cat is that the Grizzley will have, on average, between a 150-200lb weight advantage. 
 
 
 
The old saying is that a "good big man" always beats a "good little man". 
 
Well, almost always anyway.

jcol, the polar bear somethimes kills a walrus on land. but thats becaus they are relativly clumsy. in the water the polar bear would stand 0% chance. And tigers kill crocodiles on land. so that is a draw because both croc and walrus are very powerfull water animals, but clumsy on land. besides, we are talking about grizzly bears, NOT polar bears. 
 
and indeed pound for pound a tiger is stronger then a bear, toby is to dumb to understand that. BUT a grizzly does not have 200 lb advantage. 
 
Siberian tiger: 420-680 lb + 11 ft long 
 
Grizzly bear : 500-750 + 8 ft tall 
 
somethimes a grizzly may reach 1000 lb, but some tigers have also been recorded at 900 lb who reach 13 ft. 
 
the bear has barely or non weight adventage and pound for pound a tiger is stronger, and faster and, better fighter.

Mr. animalia, I think if you'll take the average weight of both animals, you'll find that the Grizzly will probably be, on average, around 150-200lbs heavier. 
 
The Bear is stronger, while the cat may be just a tad quicker, but I have no idea how you can say the Tiger is a better fighter. Both are solitary animals, thus, they avoid confrontations when possible, but there is this to consider; Grizzly's are a sub-species of the Brown Bear, and big male Brown bears will chase Tigers off of thier kills more often than Tigers chase Bears. 
 
The fact is, where predators are involved, size and/or numbers are what counts. Predators give way to larger predators, or will succumb to superior numbers. This has nothing to do with prey, both animals take down prey bigger than themselves, but when it comes to other predators, the biggest and/or strongest will usually win.

I watched your video. Impressive. Regardless of this face-off, I am impressed by tigers. Between the grizzly and the tiger, the big cat is the superior hunter.  
 
However, I disagree with both of you about the tiger being pound for pound he stronger animal. The tiger is in some respects the better athlete. He is a jumper. The bear forfeitted this ability for brute strength. The grizzly is compact and built for two things, brute strength and endurance.  
 
A professional athlete is never as strong, pound for pound, as a weight lifter. A 600 pound grizzly is stronger than a 600 pound tiger. Add this to the fact that on average, the grizzly is the bigger animal.

Have you ever known a pole vaulter, a broad jumper, or the champion of the 100 yard dash to compete in weight lifting or wrestling in the Olympics?

If by chance, both the grizzly and the tiger stand on their hind feet and were to end up hugging each other with all of their strength, the tiger would do no damage to the bear. The grizzly would probably crush the ribcage of the tiger, or at least crack some ribs, as the big cat is being suffocated.  
 
 
 
The grizzly bear is far stronger than any big cat that has ever lived.

Look, tigers hunt on bears up to 1000 lb and can knock out bears that are 1700 lb with a single blow. Now if youre gonna put the largest grizzly (1496 lb) vs an average tiger (550 lb), obviously the bear will win. But a 850 lb tiger vs 1000 lb grizzly will be an easy victory for the tiger, considering an average 550 lb tiger can kill brown bears up to 900 lb. And pound for pound a tiger is stronger then any bear. 
 
and you still havent repied on 'mother cougar vs grizzly bear' on youtube? still busy finding an excuse why a bear ran from a cougar even though he was 4 times her size.

Unlike people, animals do not have an ego problem. If an animal is injured, it cannot simply walk into the emergency room for treatment. There are times, with all animals, when they back down from another animal that they know they can kill. If the grizzly were really hungry or really angry, it would have so easily killed the cougar.  
 
I have also watched a you tube where a tiger runs from a much smaller sloth bear. But, I never mentioned these things because they mean nothing. 
 
You know that you are big enough and strong enough to kill a rat. When was the last time you grabbed one?

American black bears have been known to rip the door right off of a car. I have never heard of a lion or a tiger doing that. A grizzly is much stronger than a black bear. 
 
You avoided my questions. The tiger is an athlete built for speed and jumping. The grizzly is a weight lifter. Seems pretty obvious who is the stonger of the 2.  
 
A 600 pound grizzly could defeat a 600 pound tiger every time, in a face to face encounter.

Leaving out the sea creatures and those of watery places, I would place our top players in this order: 
 
#1- Brown bears ( Ursus Arctos ). 
 
#2- tiger. 
 
#3- lion. 
 
#4- gorilla / American black bear. 
 
$5- jaguar.

Grizzly bears turn over boulders and fallen trees that a tiger would likely be unable to budge. A grizzly bear can dig in hard frozen ground. I don't know if you have any idea how hard that is. A man cannot dig in ground like that with just a shovel. You need a pick-axe to break the groung. It takes incredible muscle power to do that. I am certain that a tiger would be incapable.  
 
There is a difference in being a stong athlete and having brute force.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38q2fDtDDvM

Mr. Animalia If you were to put your perfect battle together with the the largest tiger known to the real world vs the largest grizzly know to the real world which this debate spawned from, all of advantages would go to the grizzly. The Siberian tiger is very intellegant,very quick and has the first strike capability,however the grizzly has the stamina and brute force that would surrender the tiger after a few minutes. The tigers fur is not tough.It is soft This would easily be torn by the grizzly's claws,not that the cat would do harm to the grizzly but the toughness would be on the side of the grizzly.Stamina is also on the side of the grizzly.Cats in general tire easily and a Siberin tiger would be taxed of all of its energy from a confrontation with a large grizzly with in 3 minutes. A siberin tiger could not snap a grizzly's neck due to the mass size.Is only choice is to get to the under belly of the bear.For that to happen it would have to be under the bear.Once it has elected to do such it would be pinned to the ground and shredded like cheese. So in a perfect world your best tiger would loose to the best Grizzly.

According to "Bear Hunter's Magazine", the adult male grizzly bears of Montana average 600 pounds. These are not coastal grizzlys. These are the small ones. Every bear shot by the cowardly egotistical hunters is weighed, so this is not guess work.

Mr. animalia, where do you get that Tigers "hunt" Brown Bears of up to 1,000lbs? This goes against conventional wisdom in the animal kingdom. Predators do not usually hunt other predators, and certainly not predators larger than themselves. If anything, it's the other way around. And where in the world do you get that a single blow from a tiger would knock a 1700lb Bear out? Where do you get this stuff? Give me some links, I'd like to check this out, because in all candor, it just doesn't ring true. I'm not saying it isn't, I'm just saying it goes against everything I've ever heard or seen. 
 
I looked at the video between the Bear and the mother Cougar, and anybody could see that the Bear was just looking for an easy meal. He made NO aggressive move toward the Cougar, didn't even try to strike back. This video is from Marty Stouffer (check that spelling) who has been known to "set-up" altercations between animals, some real, some fake. Some of the animals he's used, are trained and have been in captivety since birth. I take this video with a grain of salt. If this was anything other than a mother Cougar protecting it's cubs, the Cougar would have been long gone.

A grizzly has very sharp claws 8 to 9 inches long. These claws are strong enough to dig into frozen ground where a man cannot dig a hole with a shovel. These claws are also capable of disemboweling a tiger. 
 
The claws of a tiger are designed to hold onto a prey animal while the tiger gets a srangle hold with it's jaws.  
 
All of your you tube shows are just that...shows. No real evidence of anything. Stories told by so-called witnesses, who also tell stories about Sasquatch and Yeti, also mean nothing here.  
 
When you look at the facts, it becomes clear that a grizzly is from 3 to 5 times more powerful than a tiger.

toby ross, I'll tell you what you posted on this page so far: 
 
1.A grizzly's claws can be 8-9 inch long 
 
2.how can a tiger take down a grizzly twice its size 
 
3.a grizzly is at least 5 times as strong as a tiger 
 
4.tigers lack on muscle 
 
5.a tiger would go and hide in a tree if it saw a grizzly 
 
6.if grizzly's and elephants would live in the same terretory you would hear of grizzly's killing elepahnts. 
 
 
 
Now, this is reality: 
 
1.a grizzly's claws can grow 3-4 inch long. 
 
2.a grizzly is 1.2 times as big as a siberian tiger. 
 
3.a grizzly is 1.1-1.4 times as strong as a tiger 
 
4.tigers are jacked with steel muscle 
 
5.other way around, Bengal tigers scare the living crap out of black bears, a siberian tiger could do the same to a grizzly. 
 
6.. tigers hunt on elephants that are not to big (3-5 ton). if a grizzly saw one of those it would run away 
 
 
 
toby ross, you, go blue and jcol. youre all 3 probably bear fans but I want you to realize the harsh truth. this is no contest, the tigers wins 8-9 out of 10. Replace the grizzly by a kodiak or polar and it could go either way.

these are the top land predetors, the no. 1 is a draw: 
 
 
 
1. Polar bear/Siberian tiger 
 
2. Kodiak bear 
 
3. bengal tiger 
 
4. african lion 
 
5. grizzly bear 
 
6. Jaguar 
 
7. Black bear 
 
8. leopard 
 
9. cougar 
 
10. Hyena

Animalia, youy are now putting wordss in my mouth. I never said: 
 
tigers lack in muscle. I said that tigers are far less muscular than a grizzly. 
 
I never said that a tiger will hide in a tree if it saw a grizzly. But, a tiger will not attack a full grown male grizzly. 
 
I never said that a grizzly would attack an elephant. In fact, I said that grizzly bears cannot kill elehants. They do not have "clinging claws" and bears are not jumpers. 
 
And, I said that a grizzly is from 3 to 5 times as strong as a tiger. Yes, I believe this to be true.

What this list is differ from my previous is that I split brown bears into 2 categories: grizzly and kodiak, with the kodiak being much higher rated. I also changed my mind about Bengal tiger/African lion. I also included the polar bear, after i saw it killing a walrus I was impressed and I think polar bear/siberian tiger is a draw. No. 2&3 and 5&6 are very close to a draw.

A grizzly is actually the more agressive of the bears you mentioned. In the rare cases when polar bears come into contact with grizzly bears, it is the polar bear who flees. Not because the polar bear is weaker, but because the grizzly is territorial and very agressive. 
 
A 600 pound grizzly will kill the 600 pound tiger every time.

Do your homework Animalia. Yes, a grizzly bear has 8 to 9 inche claws. Now tell us, do you believe that a tiger can dig a hole in frozen ground?

Please like i asked where are your records of the bears size my question as yet to be answered and  
 
i ask again do you want a discription of a 600 pound lion killing a 600 pound polar bear 
 
and fear the bear please  
 
you have evidence of big male brown beras fleeing from tigers tracks lol 
 
tiger wins every time 
 
 
 
bears runing from tiger's tracks 
 
i can only imagine when he see's the real tiger lol 
 
you want evidence i can show you 
 
 
 
http://jackjacksonj.webs.com/tigerpredationonbears.htm  
 
read it if you dare lol

Whether or not you answer i give the description anyway 
 
this is a documented fight of a 600 pound male lion killing a polar bear of equal size 
 
 
 
call this a story also if you want but it did happen 
 
 
 
 
 
Fierce Struggle between a Nubian Lion and a Polar Bear, In Which The Former Won. A furious right to a finish between a  
 
 
 
fierce Nubian lion and a monster Polar bear took at -Mundy's An-  
 
 
 
.ritual Show, in. Jacksonville. Fla. The  
 
 
 
bear -was badly beaten. 'but everybody  
 
 
 
admitted. that he had made a  
 
 
 
splendid fight. "Both beasts were absolutely  
 
 
 
game all the way through.  
 
 
 
The lion carried on the fight under  
 
 
 
considerable difficulties, as toward the  
 
 
 
close the keepers were shooting him  
 
 
 
and jabbing him with redhot irons  
 
 
 
The bear owed his defeat to his weakness*  
 
 
 
in offensive tactics. In. strength,  
 
 
 
weight and endurance he was fully  
 
 
 
equal to his opponent.  
 
 
 
.The fight naturally divided itself  
 
 
 
Into rounds, ' although, of course, no  
 
 
 
time rule was observed. After a fierce  
 
 
 
bout the monsters would rest for a few  
 
 
 
moments and then go at It again. The  
 
 
 
fight lasted ten rounds.  
 
 
 
The Polar bear had angered the lion  
 
 
 
in some way. possibly by his color or  
 
 
 
his cold and reserved manner. The  
 
 
 
keepers were first aware of the. trouble  
 
 
 
when the lion smashed, the partition  
 
 
 
of iron bars that separated him from  
 
 
 
the bear.  
 
 
 
The lion is a magnificent beast, 6  
 
 
 
years old which Is the prime of life In  
 
 
 
his family. He has a very thick mane  
 
 
 
and a horrid roar. When- he roars he  
 
 
 
turns up his nose and his upper lip  
 
 
 
and displays two rows of glistening  
 
 
 
fangs. Ho weighs 600 pounds. The  
 
 
 
name Roosevelt was given him because  
 
 
 
he was so fierce and handsome. The  
 
 
 
Polar bear is an equally fine specimen  
 
 
 
of his family. Ho tramps around  
 
 
 
his cage all day in a restless manner,  
 
 
 
but rarely utters a sound. He weighs  
 
 
 
600 pounds. Ho Is called Peary, in honor  
 
 
 
of the Arctic explorer.  
 
 
 
Roosevelt started the fighting by  
 
 
 
landing with the -left part- on. Bruin's  
 
 
 
right shoulder. Owing to the enormously  
 
 
 
thick fur on the bear the blow  
 
 
 
did l i t t l e damage, although the fur  
 
 
 
flew. Peary showed a desire to get to  
 
 
 
close quarters. Roosevelt preferred to  
 
 
 
use his agile feet, delivering quick, vicious  
 
 
 
'blows and hopping aside; with  
 
 
 
lightning Quickness. the first round  
 
 
 
was principally open fighting of this  
 
 
 
kind. Peary losing much fur.  
 
 
 
In the second round Roosevelt landed  
 
 
 
heavily on Peary's nose-, knocking  
 
 
 
off a considerable portion of It. Peary  
 
 
 
seemed groggy, and Roosevelt seized  
 
 
 
the opportunity to throw in a dozen  
 
 
 
blows. Peary, however, had  
 
 
 
plenty of stamina. -He backed up  
 
 
 
against the bars and rose on his: hind  
 
 
 
legs. When Roosevelt leaped at his  
 
 
 
throat ho caught the lion a fearful  
 
 
 
on the side of his head, knocking him  
 
 
 
to the floor with a great thud  
 
 
 
both then needed a rest.  
 
 
 
In the third round Roosevelt went at  
 
 
 
once for Peary's Injured nose. The  
 
 
 
latter, however, dodged cleverly. While  
 
 
 
Roosevelt 'was rushing past Peary the  
 
 
 
l a t t e r squeezed him against the bars  
 
 
 
and began clawing,' and chewing at his  
 
 
 
relatively uncovered hind quarters.  
 
 
 
Roosevelt was unable to hit back effectively  
 
 
 
but finally succeeded In  
 
 
 
dragging himself away, uttering fearful  
 
 
 
howls and roars as he did so.  
 
 
 
Roosevelt opened the fourth round  
 
 
 
In a sensational' manner by leaping  
 
 
 
high into the air and landing- on  
 
 
 
Peary's back. This worried the rather  
 
 
 
Slow bear, and Roosevelt was left at  
 
 
 
liberty to dig into his back for some  
 
 
 
seconds. By a terrific effort Peary threw  
 
 
 
Roosevelt sideways off his back, so  
 
 
 
t h a t the lion- landed on the floor with  
 
 
 
a great crush.  
 
 
 
The -proprietor of the show and all  
 
 
 
the keepers were now around the cage  
 
 
 
doing what they could to separate the  
 
 
 
fighters. The owner realized, that every  
 
 
 
time the lion landed on the bear  
 
 
 
he knocked $50 worth, of value off him,  
 
 
 
not to speak of the possibility that  
 
 
 
both might be killed. Ac first the keepers  
 
 
 
tried long- poles and iron rods on  
 
 
 
the raging beasts, hut both were utterly  
 
 
 
disregarded. They smashed the  
 
 
 
poles like matches und knocked the  
 
 
 
iron rods back so that the men holding  
 
 
 
them were Injured.  
 
 
 
In the fifth round the lion appeared  
 
 
 
A little groggy as the result of his furious  
 
 
 
and breathless fighting. He panted  
 
 
 
heavily and trembled as he hit out  
 
 
 
at Peary. The latter pressed his opponent  
 
 
 
steadily. He tore large patches  
 
 
 
of skin from his body and seemed very  
 
 
 
nearly victor. .Suddenly the lion roused  
 
 
 
himself and gave the bear a fearful  
 
 
 
blow on his already much damaged  
 
 
 
nose. Peary stepped back. That was  
 
 
 
the signal 'for a brief return, to their  
 
 
 
corners  
 
 
 
The lion, began hostilities in the  
 
 
 
sixth* round by fixing his teeth In  
 
 
 
Peary's left hind leg. The bear tried to  
 
 
 
shake him off but the Lion held on like;  
 
 
 
death.  
 
 
 
Ono of the keepers here- intervened  
 
 
 
by jabbing a red hot iron against the  
 
 
 
lion's muzzle. A fearful stench of  
 
 
 
burning flesh and hair filled the air.  
 
 
 
The lion was at last compelled to let  
 
 
 
go of the bear. he jumped back snarl-  
 
 
 
ing horribly at the human intruder.  
 
 
 
The bear seized the opportunity to  
 
 
 
throw himself on the lion and bury his  
 
 
 
teeth in the latter's back. The keeper  
 
 
 
then turned the Iron on the bear and  
 
 
 
the fight was- stopped fop a few moments,  
 
 
 
"  
 
 
 
Roosevelt quickly recovered from the  
 
 
 
weakness he had shown and began the  
 
 
 
seventh round -with a great rush. He  
 
 
 
tore Peary's coat until be was nothing  
 
 
 
but a shapeless mass of bloody tattered  
 
 
 
fur. "The unfortunate- bear tried  
 
 
 
to hug the lion. thinking no doubt,  
 
 
 
that would stop his Jabs, but the. lion  
 
 
 
did not care for this method of fighting.  
 
 
 
Peary rose up on his hind legs  
 
 
 
and Roosevelt dealt him a right paw  
 
 
 
smash that tore most of the fur off his  
 
 
 
chest. " -  
 
 
 
The two fighters danced around and  
 
 
 
rolled 'over one another so rapidly  
 
 
 
that the keepers were unable for the  
 
 
 
time to make any attempt to separate  
 
 
 
them.  
 
 
 
The ninth round began -with both  
 
 
 
fighters groggy, but still 1n the ring-  
 
 
 
The lion, had had his right paw bitten  
 
 
 
through. His mane was nearly all torn  
 
 
 
away. His back and hind quarters  
 
 
 
, were badly damaged. His left leg was  
 
 
 
nearly useless. He could not see out of  
 
 
 
his right eye  
 
 
 
The bear was much more badly off  
 
 
 
There was not a space on him as large as  
 
 
 
A man's hand that was not torn and  
 
 
 
Bloody His head was in such a  
 
 
 
deplorable condition that his nose and  
 
 
 
eyes were unrecognizable. All his paws  
 
 
 
were bitten through. His back was  
 
 
 
literally ploughed by the lion's claws.  
 
 
 
still, they kept on fighting. They  
 
 
 
growled, roared. shrieked, moaned and  
 
 
 
splattered as they did so.  
 
 
 
The bear now accomplished what he  
 
 
 
had been trying all along to do. He got  
 
 
 
a fair grip. But this move proved after  
 
 
 
all to be Peary's ruin The bear hugged  
 
 
 
the lion until the by-standers could  
 
 
 
hear the feline lighter's bones creak  
 
 
 
and groan. The lion- gasped almost  
 
 
 
breathless, but still he managed to get  
 
 
 
teeth into the under side of the  
 
 
 
bear's .throat, one of the most vulnerable  
 
 
 
parts of his body.  
 
 
 
In the death embrace the tenth  
 
 
 
round was fought out. The bear kept  
 
 
 
on squeezing the lion kept on. gripping  
 
 
 
with his teeth. The throat grip was  
 
 
 
more than the bear could stand. slowly  
 
 
 
he relaxed his grip an-d sank on his  
 
 
 
Back beaten and half dead.  
 
 
 
The lion stood over him snarling as  
 
 
 
if he meant to eat him. At this moment  
 
 
 
a courageous Keeper stepped up  
 
 
 
and smote Roosevelt between the eyes  
 
 
 
with-an iron bar. He then seemed to  
 
 
 
think he had had enough and dragged  
 
 
 
himself back to his cage quietly, where  
 
 
 
he was "barred In.  
 
 
 
The circus men secured the animals  
 
 
 
with ropes, and four veterinary surgeons  
 
 
 
set to work on their  
 
 
 
wounds. They bound them up with  
 
 
 
antiseptic dressings wherever they  
 
 
 
could and in other places used largo  
 
 
 
strips of plaster.  
 
 
 
The lion will probably recover, but  
 
 
 
The condition of the bear is desperate.  
 

And tigers can kill bears twice there size 
 
like i have said many times the tiger that had aquire a taste for bear was found with 8 separate bear kills and may i repeat EIGHT separate bear kills all of which were brown bears one of the 8 was twice the size of the tiger which was under 500 pounds 
 
i have posted the records more than once to say i made it up is like saying a panda bear is not black and white 
 
 
 
and there are scienticficproof just as how a tiger hunting a male bear is rare it is also rare for a male bear to stel from a male tiger 
 
just like the tigers who prefer to hunt the females and young brown bears male brown bears will prefer to steal from females and younger tigers 
 
 
 
and i ask where are the grizzly bear's size and the year,age and place where these animals were measured 
 
i showed mine but i have tey to get it back from anyone 
 
and just for the record i will show it again 
 
http://www.jstor.org/pss/3872615?cookieSet=1 
 
 
 
i have answer all your question but yet non of you can tell me why a large male brown bear will run from a tiger's track 
 
 
 
and i have shown the records what have you guys shown exactly? 
 
 
 
nothing but opinions that as no data to back them up 
 
i gave my opinion but i also have real data 
 
so why can't we make this fair 
 
data fo data huh?

Daniel, Nubian lions are extinct in the wild. You are talking about pampered zoo animals.  
 
Also, all of these fabricated stories and staged you tube fights are meaningless and not evidence of anything.  
 
A 600 pound grizzly will kill a 600 pound tiger every time.

Alright, I was evidently wrong about the bear claws. One site states 8 to 9 inches. A few sites say 3 to 4 inches. But, most sites that I found say that a male grizzly has claws from from 4 to 5.75 inches long.

Toby, When I said that tigers attack and kill elephants, and grizzly bears dont, I remember you saying that if elephants and grizzly bears lived in the same terretory we would hear of grizzly's killing elephants, which is impossible. There is no doubt that pound for pound, a tiger is more muscular then any bear. you DID say that when a tiger would see a grizzly, if its smart enough it will run away. And a grizzly is 13.5 times stonger then a men, a tiger is 11.4 times strong then a men. so a grizzly is 1.18 times stronger then a tiger, I estimeted 1.1-1.4. and A grizzly's claws can be 4 inch, you do your homework and Go to blueplanetbiomes.com. find grizzly bear. 75% of a bears diet is differ kinds of plants, for the rest insects, honey, small rodents, mammals and carcasses. So why would a grizzly take the risk of fighting a tiger if it can find so much other food, the bear will be the one that will back up. 
 
You are laking on knowledge about this subject. do NOT underestimate big cats

Man, this is crazy. Daniel, that was a good try, but anybody with any sense can tell you what was going on with the Tiger that was 'eating" Brown Bears. It was Winter, the Tiger obviously had dug into the dens of the Bears, all of whom except one, were HIBERNATING. The one who put up a fight was probably not yet in full hibernation mode, and why there was evidence of a fight. Do you seriously think that none of the other bears would have put up a fight if this wasn't the case? use a little common sense, please. 
 
So what you have here, is a Tiger who was smart enough to realize that if you catch Bears Hibernating, they're a lot easier to kill. That's ONE Tiger. Do you have ANY proof of other Tigers actually hunting Brown Bears? 
 
ANY proof at all?  
 
As for the Lion and the Polar Bear, you are talking about a very large Lion, against a pretty small polar Bear. That's IF it actually happened. 
 
Where do you get that Brown Bears run at the sight of Tiger tracks? Where did you read that? 
 
And finally, to Mr. animalia, one more time; TIGERS DO NOT HUNT ELEPHANTS! the fact that a Tiger has actually killed an Elephant is indeed impressive, but they don't hunt them. They are too big, too strong, and there are a lot more easier prey for the Tiger to go after.

Ya know, sometimes it's not what someone says, it's what they DON'T say that makes all the difference. 
 
Daniel, I do beleive you're trying to pull a fast one on us. I think I found where you got the info that sometimes Brown Bears will turn away from Tiger tracks. That has indeed been observed. 
 
 
 
Now would you like to tell the REST of the story? 
 
I'll give you the option of doing so, in the interest of fair play. If you refuse to do so, I'll ask you to supply me with the exact link to where you got that info, just to make sure you're not holding back any info that you weren't aware of. 
 
If however, it turns out that we got our info from the same site, and you still refuse to reveal ALL the facts, I'm gonna rip ya a new one. 
 
Your choice, choose wisely.

No Animalia. I never said that bears kill elephants. You are delirious.  
 
Yes, a grizzly's claw can be from 4 inches to 5.75 inches. ( read from more than a single source ).

I highly doubt that a tiger ever attacked and killed a full grown bull elephant. But, on the remote chance that it did, you are talking about the more ferocious Bengal tiger. 
 
Now, all of you tiger worshippers are forever yelling, "Wrong bear! Wrong Bear!" So, why don't you stick with SIBERIAN tigers?  
 
 
 
And besides ( hee hee ) an American grizzly could kill the tiger who killed the elephant anyway.  
 
Next...show us a reliable video of a tiger killing a bull elephant.

To start with, for the sake of argument, the term "grizzly" is often used my naturalists and other professionals as a term for ANY member of Ursus Arctos.  
 
Mister Animalia asks...why would a grizzly fight a tiger when he can eat roots and grubs? 
 
 
 
If a grizzly smells a freshly killed animal, and a grizzly's sense of smell is far superior to a tiger's, the grizzly will go for it. The grizzly will walk straight toward the tiger with his kill without hesitation. This is simply what a grizzly bear does. The grizzly will take the kill. The tiger will back down.  
 
Grizzly bears have been doing this for tens of thousands of years. They take food from predators who are better hunters. The grizzly is the T-rex of the modern world.  
 
If, as only happens in extremely rare cases, the 600 pound tiger attempts to fight the 600 pound grizzly, then the bear will kill the tiger.

I am certain that a 600 pound grizzly is stronger than a 600 pound tiger. But, if their muscle power could be put to the test, I would wager that a 600 pound American black bear is stronger than a 600 pound tiger. This would be a close contest.

http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/conflict13.html  
 
Tigers have low density bones and muscles developed to be elastic. 
 
Grizzly bears have high density heavy bones and muscles developed for raw strength.

Here is a list of all of the land animals that a grizzly bear cannot kill. 
 
#1- elephant. 
 
#2- rhinoceras. 
 
#3- hippopotomus.

Black bear vs tiger close consest. 
 
OMG, what and idiot 
 
bengal tigers beat the living crap out of black bears, a siberian tiger would do the same to a grizzly bear. Pound for pound, a tiger is more muscular then any bear. 850 lb tiger would destroy a 1000 lb grizzly easily. Polar bear vs Siberian tiger would be a close contest. the bear taller, heavier and stronger and the tiger longer, faster and better fighter 
 
these land animals will kill a grizzly : 
 
siberian tiger 
 
Bengal tiger 
 
Lion 
 
elephant 
 
rhino 
 
Hippo 
 
Polar bear 
 
Kodiak bear 
 
Russian bear 
 
Even a large jaguar. 
 
And here is the video of tiger scaring away an elephant, if a grizzly was there instead it would run away from the elephant: http://www.metacafe.com/watch/yt-wfzlJMXLztA/tiger_vs_bull_elephant_bull_elephant_is_scared_of_tiger_and_runs_tiger_owns_all/

Pound for pound, a grizzly bear is 3 to 5 times stronger than any tiger. A grizzly has stronger bone density and muscles designed for brute strength rather than elastic ( rubber bands ).  
 
The only animals on your list that could kill a grizzly are the elephant, rhino, and hippo. 
 
 
 
A grizzly bear could have lion for breakfast and tiger for lunch without breaking a sweat. 
 
A 600 pound grizzly can easily kill a 600 pound ( and much weaker ) tiger.

Mr. animalia, A large Jaguar would kill a Grizzly? 
 
Really? 
 
See, now you're acting like a fool. 
 
We can argue about Siberian Tigers, but let's get real; A 250lb jaguar, And that's larger than average, wouldn't be much more than a snack for a 800lb grizzly. 
 
 
 
You're getting a little crazy with this.

I recently watched a program which showed the bite-force of various animals being measured. They were surprized at how weak the bite force is on lions and tigers. Since they merely strangle their prey, there is no need for bone-crushing force. For both the grizzly and the gorilla, their bite is even stronger than that of a wolf and just short of the bite-force of a hyena.

Mr. Animalia. Please show us a reliable video of a tiger killing an Indian rhinoceras. 
 
And again I ask, why do you get upset when you are thinking that we are refering to a Kodiak or some other brown bear? 
 
Are Siberian tigers killing elephants and rhinos in the snow?  
 
We should be just as free to include any Ursus arctos, since you seem to be free to include any Panthera tigris.

A 600 pound grizzly can kill a 600 pound tiger.

When you figure that there are very few people in such a huge expanse of frozen land in Siberia, then it becomes clear that probably less than one in a thousand tiger attacks on bears are witnessed, including even the discovery of remains.  
 
I would make a sensible guess that far less than 50% of such attacks are successful. I doubt that a healthy full grown male grizzly ( brown bear for you whiners ) is ever attacked at all. I cannot believe that a tiger would be that stupid.

I just did a little reading. You are right Amimalia. A tiger will sometimes attack and kill an Indian rhinoceras.  
 
Of course, they only go after unguarded calves. Stands to reason, this would hold true with elephants too. So this has me thinking that I am right that tigers only hunt female and juvenile grizzly bears.

Toby, for the last Time! these results where taken by National Geographic: Siberian tiger 11.4x stronger then a men; Grizzly bear 13.5 times stronger then a men; so a grizzly is 1.18 times stronger, no more. you believe that a grizzly is 3-5 times as strong as a tiger is what makes you the biggest fool on this site 
 
And a grizzly would also lose from the king. lions are faster and packed with solid muscle, thats what makes them 10x as strong as a men. a grizzly may be 1.35 times as strong. But the lion having more experience and being much faster will beat the grizzly. 
 
Now a jaguars ussually are 200-260 lb, but some are that 350 lb will kill a 750 lb grizzly. Jaguars are the most powerfull cats,and very aggresive in nature. there have been records of jaguars killing caimans and even anacondas! I have asked this question on allexperts and they said that a large jaguar can kill a grizzly.

TOBY ROSS, a tiger hunts female russian bears, that is correct. Now, a female russian bear gets 500-700 lb. that is as big as a Grizzly bear. so if a tiger hunts and kills russian bears, it could do the same to a male grizzly. 
 
AND ALSO bengal tigers and black bears have had many conflicts before, and the bengel tiger always beats the living crap out of black bears, a siberian tiger could do the same to a grizzly.

Mr,Animalia has cat fever. You did not read the site I posted did you. Grizzly bears have denser bones than cats and bears in general have more solid muscles than cats.  
 
The black bears that tigers hunt are smaller than American black bears. Tigers probably just go after females and juveniles with them too.  
 
I watched an episode of Wild Kingdom once. This goes back a few years! There was a jaguar drinking from a small pond. Guess who shows up. A Mexican grizzly ( obviously one of the last ). The jaguar saw the grizzly slowly ambling down towards the water. The big cat turned tail and ran.  
 
*Cat muscle has evolved to be elastic where as bear muscle is solid for brute strength.  
 
*Check out the site that I have posted twice.

Campared to athletes in the Olympics 
 
The tiger ( Panthera tigris ) is a high jumper, a broad jumper, a gymnast, a sprinter. 
 
The grizzly ( Ursus arctos ) is a weight lifter and a wrestler.

For those of you who did not do your homework, there is only one species of brown bear. Ursus arctos. Within this species are various sub-species. The same holds true for Panthera tigris. So, why do all of you with cat fever keep crying about Kodiaks and coastal grizzly bears?  
 
You don't hear us bear people complaining when you talk about your Bengal tigers killing (giggle) elephants. This is basically Ursus arctos vs Panthera tigris. 
 
A 600 pound grizzly will maul and mangle your 600 pound tiger.  
 
 
 

While Panthera tigris is by far the better hunter of the two, Ursus arctos is the apex predator everywhere he lives.

Toby  
 
you really seem to be lacking on knowledge about cats, cheetah's muscle are evolved to be elastic but a tigers are there for pure power. a cheetah is like a sprinter, a cougar like a distance jumper and a tiger is like a wrestler, it has the skill, power and speed to take down his opponents far larger: bulls, buffalos and even rhinos. you underestemare big cat, you think they are simple push overs? 
 
tiger beats grizzly 8 out of 10

http://www.laiurweb.org.nz/tiger/conflict13.html 
 
ALL cats muscles are evolved to be elastic. IF the tiger had muscles designed for brute strength, he could not jump as he does.  
 
I am not here to insult your tigers. I admire them. IF not for Ursus arctos, the tiger would be the apex predator.  
 
 
 
Against a full-sized rhino, a grizzly would stand a better chance than a tiger. But, if I were to place a bet, it would be on the rhino.

http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/conflict13.html

Mr. animalia, your claim that Brown bears make up 5-8% of a Tiger's diet is false. The statement was that Asian Black Bears and ursula Brown Bears make up 5-8% of the Tiger's Diet, with the Brown Bear making up 1-1.50% of that.  
 
Daniel, you keep saying that Brown Bears run from Tiger Tracks, and yes that has been observed, but the article you got that from, goes on to say that Brown Bears are just as likely to follow the tracks, in hopes of finding the Tiger with captured prey, and taking that kill away from the Tiger, which it usually does if such an encounter occurs. 
 
If you guys, and anybody else for that matter (myself included), are gonna throw out statements like that, please have the guts to place ALL of it out for everyone to see, and not cherry pick facts to support your argument. It is dishonest to do otherwise. 
 
Now, it is true that if the Tiger's natural food source dries up, they will indeed be forced to hunt Bear. Tigers are carnivores. They only eat meat. They are also ambush hunters, and that's the safest way to go about hunting Bear. The killing bite has to be done quickly though, because Tigers rarely make a living by hunting Brown Bears. By contrast, Brown Bears rarely hunt Tigers. They don't need to. Bears are omnivores. They'll eat meat, berries, plants, grubs, fish, almost anything leading up to preparing for the winter months. Like all predators, they'll go after the easiest prey they can find, going after dangerous prey only when forced to. 
 
So what does all this mean? 
 
Tigers will Hunt Brown Bears as a last resort, and so far as anybody know, only with the ambush technique. 
 
Tigers will usually back down in a face-to-face confrontation with a Brown Bear over food. 
 
Typically, a large Grizzly's weight will increase the closer it gets to winter and hibernation. It can easily exceed 800+ lbs, depending on it's frame size. During this time, they are ravenous, and nothing is safe when they are in the area. They will Kill and eat almost everything they can catch and/or take away from another predator, and nothing short of a very brave, or hungry, pack of Wolves can do anything about it. 
 
A tiger that grows beyond 600lbs is exceptional, not typical. 
 
Mr. animalia, I'd like to know who these experts are that you talked to that say a large Jaguar could kill a Grizzly. Could you list them for me, please? 
 
Look, I have a great affection for Siberian Tigers, I think they are the most majestic of all Predators. 
 
But the average Siberian Tiger has little chance against the average Grizzly in a head-to-head battle. 
 
Just my opinion, but given the size, weight and strength advantage the Grizzly has, I don't see how anybody could think differently. The Tiger's best bet would be to take on the Grizzly just after Hibernation, when the Bear is at it's smallest, hungry but weaker from weight depletion.

jcol, an expert on allexperts.com stated that if a jaguar would fight a black bear it would win, but it would lose from a grizzly. BUT if a large 350 lb jaguar met a an average 600 lb grizzly the cat would win because they are so aggresive in nature and superb fighters, jaguars kill caimans and even anacondas! now the size of a grizzly youre stating is wrong. this is the correct size and diet comparesion: 
 
Siberian tiger 420-680 lb but may reach over 850 lb in rare cases. they manly hunt on buffalo, bull and other cows, also deer but even female and young brown bears are a part of there diet.  
 
grizzly bear 500-750 but may reach 1000 lb in rare cases. 75% of there diet is vegie but somethimes eats berries, insects and mammals. 
 
NOW tigers hunt on female russian brown bears, females reach beyond 700 lb. that is as much as a large male grizzly! so its clear that a siberian tiger can easily kill a bear up to 900 lb. jcol, toby and go blue all underestimate big cats. 
 
 
 
and toby ross,  
 
youre kidding right? 
 
a tiger stands a much better chance against a rhino then a grizzly. I posted a video of a BENGAL tiger scaring away an elephant, so if a tiger is so much weaker then a grizzly how come elephants fear them? if a grizzly roared to an elephant it would just make the 5 tonner mad and will probably get killed. the bear may be 1.18x stronger and 1.2 times but the tiger is faster, better fighter and more experienced 
 
 
 
tiger kills grizzly every time, polar bear vs siberian tiger could go either way.

What Mr.Animalia fails to understand is, a wild animal does not have an ego problem. When an animal is injured, there is noone there to wrap the wound or set a broken bone.  
 
IF a grizzly, an elephant, or a rhino runs, it is not because it fears the tiger. It is because there is no good reason to fight. There are no heros or cowards among animals. 
 
A grizzly bear would easily kill a jaguar. An American black bear would stand a 50-50 chance against a jaguar. 
 
Tiger vs three and a half tons of rhinoceras is just funny. A grizzly would stand a better chance. And of course...a 600 pound grizzly could kill a 600 pound tiger.

Did you know, Mr.Animalia, that when a polar bear enters grizzly country, it is the polar bear who runs? A grizzly will chase a polar bear out of it's domain. Grizzly bears are territorial. This does not mean that polar bears fear grizzly bears. It is simply that there is no good reason for the polar bear to risk injury. 
 
 
 
Tigers do not hunt elephants or rhinos. A tiger will hunt female brown bears and/or cubs when the tiger has no other choices avaiable. Then, against a female grizzly, it has to be a well formulated ambush, if the tiger wishes to survive.

Toby,  
 
tigers hunt on female russian bears, those female russian bears are the same size as a male grizzlies, so a tiger would kill a grizzly as easily as it kills a female russian bear. National geographic ones did a documentary of wildlife in siberia and in conflicts between brown bears and tigers the bears are the ones who back up, a tiger will steel the prey of a russian bear. a grizzly is smaller and weaker then a russian bear so it will just make it easier for the tiger. 
 
and bengal tigers do hunt elephants up to 5 tons and rhinos up to 2.5 tons go learn something. 
 
 
 
rhino vs tiger chances are 70-30 
 
rhino vs grizzly chances are 90-10  
 
how could a grizzly stand a better chance? tigers are faster, better fighter, more experienced and they know what it takes to kill prey much bigger then themself. 
 
obviously an 850 lb tiger will easily kill a 1000 lb grizzly.

I went to that site, Mr. animalia, and they had more "experts" who say the Black Bear would win over the Jaguar. I never found the "expert" who says a very large, and very rare jaguar would take a grizzly twice it's size. Every other "expert" on the site picked the Grizzly over the Jaguar, regardless of size. I could find no one who picked the Jaguar. 
 
Not one.

Mr. animalia, Tigers DO NOT HUNT MATURE ELEPHANTS! They just don't do it. They may go after the young once in a great while, but they DON'T HUNT the adults. 
 
And, full grown male Brown Bears, take food away from Tigers more often than Tigers will take from Bears. Tigers avoid confrontation with the big male bears. 
 
No matter how many time you say different will make it so.

FACTS about a grizzly / tiger of equal size: 
 
The grizzly is stronger. 
 
The grizzly has denser bones. 
 
The grizzly is smarter. 
 
The grizzly has greater endurance. 
 
The grizzly has a stronger bite.  
 
The tiger is slightly quicker.

Jcol i showed you records already 
 
 
 
"In January 1941, I encountered the prints of a very large brown bear near the mouth of the Ta-Kunzha River, a tributary of the Kema River; this animal, which had accidentally come across a tiger family on the trail, abandoned this path at a gallop.š At another site, he came across the track of a male tiger and also turned away from the tiger's track." 
 
 
 
thats telling me that brown bears fear tigers i don't know what it says to you guys though 
 
 
 
and grizzlies can climb trees i have no idea where you are get that from? 
 
 
 
http://www.yellowstoneparknet.com/nature_wildlife/bears.php 
 
 
 
http://animal.discovery.com/videos/stranger-among-bears-grizzly-climbs-to-50-feet.html 
 
 
 
and this link i found here 
 
http://www.loukashkin.org/Tigers/index.htm 
 
 
 
i don't feel like repeating so i'll tell you to go and look at what I said the first time I mentioned the lion vs polar bear fight and yes it did happen 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
there is even a record of 140 kg tigress fighting and killing a 170 kg brown bear  
 
a fight could not have happen if the bear was asleep because then that would be hunting 
 
 
 
a lion/tiger fighting any brown bear of equal size or larger will them 100/100 
 
 
 
and that tiger that killed the 8 brown bears hunted brown bears all year round the article says the tiger only ate brown bears  
 
all his scat had brown bear in them 
 
unless of course you are saying bears hibernate all year round? lol

tigers hunt female broen bears and cubs. The tiger must calculate his ambush precisely to overpower the female grizzly. It is highly likely that not every ambush on a female brown bear is successful. Face-to-face, even this female brown bear is more than a tiger can handle.

Daniel, what you just posted shows the actions of ONE Brown Bear, and this person didn't see what actually happened. He saw tracks of two different animals, he gives no time-table as to when these sets of tracks may have occured. 
 
In most cases you have presented, the Bears were either female or undersized.  
 
 
 
You state a record of a 140kg Tigress fighting a 170kg Brown Bear, but tell us the Bear couldn't have been sleeping. Well, did you read the report or not? What did the report say? Did it give any details aside from the outcome? If so, how can you know ANYTHING about the how it started? 
 
You've said nothing about how Brown Bears will just as often follow the tracks of Tigers and take thier kills away from them.  
 
The average Tiger will weigh up to 550lbs. A 650lb Tiger is exceptional, but not the norm, and and a tiger over 700 is rare. 
 
The average Grizzly will run close to 650lbs, and the closer you get to Winter, the bigger they get. 
 
A big male Siberian Tiger, will not take on a big male Grizzly. 
 
This is why they let the Bear take over thier kills.  
 
Fighting the Grizzly is not a good idea, and they know it.

C'mon daniel. In one of the liks you provided, it shows a female Grizzly which climbed 50ft up a tree after her cub. Even the guy watching her said that was amazing, as most Grizzlies can rarely climb more than 25 ft, if that. Another link said that Black bears can climb trees because thier claws are curved. Grizzly Cubs can climb trees along with some young adults, because they haven't grown heavy enough yet. 
 
The last link simply told of a story of a Tiger coming across the lair of a Grizzly and after chasing it out, fighting with it, it finally escapes up a tree. 
 
It said NOTHING about how big the Grizzly was, but it couldn't have been too big as it had no trouble getting up the tree. 
 
There were no details.  
 
Daniel, so far, none of the links you've posted have done very much to bolster your argument. 
 
You need to find better links, son.

Daniel  
 
Polar bears are highly prone to overheating, in any case that lion vs polar bear, the bear could have just overheated more quickly than usual because it is not in its natural environment and stop fighting making him defenseless to stop the lion. 
 
That is why the polar bear’s diet usually consist of seals because they overheat before they can catch most other animal in its domain. 
 
 
 
A polar bear isn't used to long term battles because this will also lead to overheating so in a fight between a polar bear and a Kodiak I will say the Kodiak would win most of the time. 
 
In an Enclosed Area 
 
Now the bears fighting style is typically to stand on its hind legs and swing its paws like clubs, if the tiger chooses to fight like this also on his hind legs then he is surely died. But the bears fighting style isn’t all that secure when he stands he is reveling his underside to the tiger and if the tiger decides to fight low to the ground it can cause a great deal amount of damage to the bear, if the tiger gets hold of the stomach with its claws and jaws it can even rip the bears stomach open much like the record of the tiger choosing to attack the lion’s hide legs instead of the lion’s neck. And while the lion was immobilized the tiger proceeded to rip his stomach open.  
 
To my previous statement a tiger/big cats attacking like this will also go after the hind legs maybe with a force strong enough to cause the bear the topple over backwards/forward. What the tiger will do after that depends on the tiger. 
 
The standing issue: the average grizzly bear will stand 7ft tall and a tiger on its hind legs 7-8 ft tall given the body length is 6 or either 7 ft long. 
 
Typically a tiger would attack the face of the bear but a single hit to the tiger's rib cage will automatically cause internal damage to the tiger. How hard the animals will hit each other is again depends on the animals and single hits form the tiger to the bear’s head can rip the bear's scalp off. If the bear tries to hug the tiger then this can be a fatal move. Big cats in close quarters to anything will almost always attempt to maul its victim. The bear can risk damage to its chest and stomach having it letting go of the tiger. 
 
The strength issue: this also depends on how the animals are built a grizzly can move a boulder with the diameter of the average man’s arm span because bears are built in that way, a tiger in any case can never do that but a case of a tiger of unknown gender was able to pull a dead bull guar which 13 adult men could not even budge I’m pretty sure a bear could accomplish this task as well but how strong are the animals is unknown. Most of which is there is based upon estimations. 
 
But in the end the fight will not be easy for both competitors for even in Siberia male tigers and male brown bears are said to be a threat to each other but I’ll give the advantage to the bear for strength. 
 
Anyone else wishing to analyze the fight in an enclosed area?  
 

these are FACTS about 1000 lb grizzly vs 850 lb tiger 
 
 
 
1.The tiger is much faster (48 kmh vs 80 kmh) 
 
2.tigers are much better hunter 
 
3.the grizzly is slightly stronger 
 
4.pound for pound a tiger is more muscular 
 
5.a grizzly is more of a vegie eater while tigers are real hunters 
 
6.tigers are master fighters 
 
7.a grizzly is slightly heavier 
 
8.tigers hunt brown bears up to nine hunderd lb 
 
9.grizzly has more stamina 
 
tiger : 6 advantages 
 
Grizzly : 3 advantages 
 
more then clear who'd win? 
 
 
 
Toby, in every single one of youre comments you seem to put the tiger down, are all those comment really youre thinking? or you hate big cats for some reason?

And indeed tigers do not hunt adult elephant but according to that book Death by a Thousand Claws indochinese tigers were used to fight elephants 1 on 1 and if the elephants were to survive they were seen suited for war.  
 
Thats all I know about the elephant issue but tigers that are used to the pressense of elephants do not seem to fear them

even a 400 lb tigress could kill a 650 lb grizzly bear.  
 
tiger vs Grizzly = no contest, tiger wins every time (explaination is above) 
 
Tiger vs polar bear = good contest, with the bear taller, heavier and stronger while the tiger longer, faster and better fighter this is a really close call 
 
top 5 predetors in my opinion: 
 
1. tiger/polar bear 
 
2. kodiak bear 
 
3. lion 
 
4. grizzly 
 
5. jaguar

Mr. animalia, you've gone beyond silly and you're now just acting foolish. 
 
I see no need to continue this debate any further. 
 
You've lost touch with reality and common sense. 
 
Have a good time in la-la land.

Jcol, you lost. you and toby are in a fantasy world. or you 2 are just bear fans, my 2 comments above are the harsh truth for any bear fan like you. tiger kills grizzly 9 out of 10 -no contest-

This is not a contest between us, animalia. It's a one-sided debate. 
 
My dear ol' pappy used to tell me to never argue with an idiot, people may not be able to tell the difference. 
 
You've gone off into goof-ball land, and you seem to be happy there, so that's where I'll leave you. If it makes you feel better to think that you won something, you just knock yourself out, slick.

Mr.Animalia...wake up! The grizzly is MUCH stronger. The tiger is slighty faster. Being the better hunter will not help Mr.Tiger in a face-off. Pound for pound the grizzly is more muscular. Tiger muscles are elastic, not for brute strength. Grizzly bears eat their veggies ( that's a good thing ). Master fighters? Both animals know how to fight. Yes, the grizzly has more stamina. After he has killed the tiger, he will not even be tired.

After some research, I can clear up a misunderstanding. The tiger can run from 35 to 40 mph and keep it up for a few seconds. The grizzly can run 35 to 40 mph and keep it up for miles!  
 
speed = equals. 
 
strength = grizzly.  
 
stamina = grizzly. 
 
The tiger is by far the better jumper. I can see no other advantage in the big cat's favor.  
 

Wild beasts do not have egos. A wild animal will not stand and fight without a really good reason. I know that I can squeeze the life out of a rat with one hand. However, because I do not wish to be bitten, I will not grab a rat. A Chinese monk once watched a crane defend her nest from a tiger. The tiger backed down from the skinny long-legged bird. 
 
Tigers do not fear cranes. If one animal refuses to fight another, it is because there is no reason to risk even the slightest injury.  
 
If a grizzly runs from a tiger, it is because he has no reason to fight on that particular day. If a tiger willingly gives up a kill to a grizzly, it is because he isn't yet hungry enough to risk injury or death.  
 
Wild beasts will fight only when there is no other options. There are no heros and no cowards among them. Sloth bears have been known to chase away tigers. Tigers are known to hunt and kill sloth bears. Neither beast will stand and fight without a reason.

toby, your info is wrong. tiger has alot of favor 
 
speed: tiger 1.6x 
 
strenght: grizzly 1.18x 
 
better fighter: tiger 
 
musclular: tiger 
 
intelligence: equal  
 
stamina: grizzly 
 
tigers are real hunters. 
 
go re-seach, cats are very intelligent and grizzlies are only 1.18 times faster and tigers are more muscle less fat.

I mean grizzlies are only 1.18 times stronger.

Tigers are awesome. In Siberia the temp can drop down to -96 degrees F. 
 
If I were in Siberia without a weapon, I would fear the tiger more than I would the grizzly. Why? Because the tiger is strictly carnivorous! The grizzly might pass me by. The tiger will not, unless he is well fed. Tigers definately do more killing of herbivores. They are natural born hunters, which make them natural born killers. 
 
I have the highest respect for tigers. However, in a face to face encounter, a 600 pound grizzly will kill the 600 pound tiger every time. Raw power wins over the tiger's experiance.

Once again for the slow learners. The tiger can run 35 to 40 mph for only a few seconds. The grizzly can run 35 to 40 mph for miles! 
 
Same speed but the bear has endurance. The tiger is NOT faster.

Muscle mass! The grizzly has bigger heavier bones which are dencer than those of any cat. Why? To hold more muscle mass. Much more! 
 
The tiger has lighter bones for elastic muscle power. If the tiger had the brute force of a grizzly bear, he would not be a jumper. You cannot be a weight-lifter and win in a high jump or broad jump contest. It is simple science. 
 
I would estimate that a 600 pound grizzly is from 3 to 5 times as strong as a 600 pound tiger.

Yes, the tiger is by far the better hunter. However, in a face-off, this fact is no help to the tiger. Better fighter? Grizzly's fight other grizzly bears very often. So, as fighters, I would say equal.  
 
The tiger simply has nothing going for him to compensate for the grizzly's overpowering strength.  
 
 
 
You had asked why I believe that a grizzly would stand a better chance against a 3 and a half ton rhino? Because, if the tiger hits the rhino, the rhino will not even know that he has been hit. If the fight starts off at close quarters and the grizzly hits the rhino, the bear can stagger the rhino. The grizzly would stand perhaps a 40% chance of winning. The tiger a 0% chance. 
 
If the rhino is in full charge, neither the tiger nor the grizzly could stop him.

Mr.Animalia, this is for you. 
 
The tiger can leap incredible distance and height. Here is more. The tiger has slightly longer teeth which are sharper than a bear's teeth. The tiger has eqaully as long claws which are sharper than a bear's claws. 
 
A 600 pound grizzly would annihilate a 600 pound tiger.

Toby, ones again! a grizzly is 1.18x stronger then a tiger. a grizzly will lose from a rhino 9 out of 10, a tiger loses from a rhino 6 out of 10. bears are not build to kill prey larger then themself. cats are made for that. 
 
Imagin 2 wrestlers faced each other: 
 
Contender no.1 : the grizzly up to 1000 lb and 8 ft tall, 50% muscle & 50% fat, okey fighter and runs at 50 kmh. 13.5x as strong as a 
 
Contender no.2 : the tiger up to 850 lb and 11 ft long, 80% muscle & 20% fat, very skilled fighter and runs at 80 kmh. 11.5x as strong as a men. 
 
clear the tiger would win in a face to face fight

In your wrestling match... 
 
The grizzly is Hoss Cartwright. 
 
The tiger is Little Joe Cartwrite.  
 
A 600 pound grizzly is far stronger than a 700 pound tiger.

elastic elastic elastic elastic! A tiger has elastic muscles, NOT brute strength. If a tiger had the brute strength of a grizzly, he would not be the fantastic jumper that he is.  
 
Perhaps a 350 pound grizzly is only 1.18 times stronger as a 700 pound tiger.

a tiger has both brutal strenght and elastic muscle! i told you a tiger is 11.5x as strong as a man and a grizzly 13.5x as strong as a man, if a tiger had only elastic muscle he wouldn't be this strong. if in the olempics the cheetah would be a sprinter (75 mph), cougar would be a long jumper (40 ft), the tiger would be a wrestler (1 blow is as powerfull as 3.6 ton), a leopard would be a weight lifter (they can carry 2.5x there weight straight up in a tree), a jaguar would be body-builder (the most muscular cat of all) and the bear would be a lazy fat guy infront of his TV watching the olempics. why? because cats are far more athletic then any bear, ever heard of a guy in the olempics with bodyfat over 10%? another example: a wrestling match in one corner (grizzly) a 200 lb guy with muscle-fat ratio of 50-50 and in the other corner (tiger) a 180 lb guy witha muscle-fat ratio of 80-20 and a much more skilled fighter. obviously the tiger will win. this is no fight tiger wins 9 out of 10 atleast. even a tigress would kill a grizzly

BTW : Toby, if i was lost in siberia... ; grizzly bears dont live in siberia genius. that is another sign that you are lacking on knowledge about this subject.

I know where grizzlys live. But, did you also know that the term "grizzly" is also used by naturalists as a term for any "Ursus arctos? Kodiaks are also called the grizzlys of Kodiak Island. 
 
This fight is about Ursus arctos vs Panthera tigis. And why do you cry every time you think someone is talking about an Ursus arctos other than an American grizzly? And, did you not know that the black grizzly lives in Siberia?  
 
Do you hear me crying when you talk about your Bengal tiger ( giggle ) hunting elephants and rhinos? No!  
 
So, this is about Ursus arctos vs Panthera tigris. A 600 pound grizzly is from 3 to 5 times stronger than a 600 pound tiger. And no, yout tiger does not have brute strength. That is scientifically impossible, as I have explained again and again and again.  
 
If a grizzly could leap upon the back of an elephant, that would mean that he lacked the brute strength of a bear. Tigers are members of the cat family. Cats ( all cats ) evolved elastic muscle so as to be quick moving, flexible, and good jumpers. Bears evolved into omnivores with brute strength, like a bull, a buffalo, or a rhino. But in the body of a carnivore.

alright all you tiger fans this is how it is, if a tiger (any tiger) cant kill a lion (which they CANT) then a tiger has no chance against a bear espacally a grizzly bear there is no compotition for the bear at all! Ok let me put it this way a 640lbs tiger vs a 1500lbs bear hhmmm those facts should say it all. The bear will win no matter what! 100 times out of 100 times! If you dont believe me know then your just a dumb ass!

You are right Bear Man. In fact, even though the average grizzly is bigger than the average tiger, even if it were a 640 pound grizzly vs 640 pound tiger, the grizzly would still easily win. Ursus arctos has the brute strength to easily overpower the big cat. Even a female grizzly is more than a match for a tiger. Especially if she is guarding her cubs.

Why Ursus arctos is the true King of Beasts is posted on myspace: Og-Lee / Toby Ross.

The most powerful cat ever ( pound for pound ) was Smilodon. He was built for strength and power much more so than any living cat. Paleontologists describe this saber-toothed cat as having an almost bear-like physique. Pound for pound, Smilodon was probably almost as strong as a black bear. A grizzly, however, because of being adapted to digging in hard frozen ground, would be ( pound for pound ) much stronger than a Smilodon.

Bear man, we are talking about a grizzly, NOT A KODIAK. a grizzly can get 750 lb on maximum, a tiger 675 lb on max, very rare size difference. and a bears weight commes from fat and muscle; a tigers commes from muscle only. not to talk about the fact that a tiger is faster, better fighter and more experience hunting. tiger will kill a grizzly every time. even a 400 lb tigress is more then a match for your teddy 
 
And toby, yes the smilodon was the most powerfull cat ever, but almost as strong as a black bear? a lion is stronger then a black bear, a smilodon was stronger then a polar bear. go learn something! bears have 50% muscle for power and the other 50% goes to fat. a tiger has 50% elastic muscle and 40% muscle for power and 10% fat, so pound for pound a tiger is stronger then a bear. now dont say a high jumper and sprinter cannot be a wrestler, its getting old. a tiger is clearly all 3 of them. running in at 80 kmh, a 28 ft jump and a blow as powerfull as 3.6 ton it could easily kill a grizzly any day.

Siberian tigers can get 850 lb, there is no land predetor that could kill it except MAYBE a 1500 lb polar bear, polar bear and siberian tiger are the top land predetors, in a conflict this will be very unpredictable. plar bear taller, stronger and heavier. while the siberian tiger faster, longer and better fighter. 
 
this contest however, can only go one way. the grizzly stands no chance against a full grown male tiger.

Bear Man, you just have to overlook Mr.Animalia. He has cat fever. 
 
Mr.Animalia, show me! Give me the name of the athlete ( either Olympics or professional ) who is a broad jumper, high jumper, or gymnast who also won gold or other matals as an Olympic or profssional weight-lifter. 
 
You cannot, because it is scientifically impossible. If the tiger had the brute strength of a grizzly, it could not leap upon the back of an elephant. It is not physically possible. That is why an elephant cannot jump at all. 
 
OH!!! There you go crying again. Not Kodiak! Not Kodiak! Not Kodiak!  
 
We are talking about Ursus arctos vs Panthera tigris, ever since all of you tiger fans started talking about the exploits of the Bengal. Now, every brown bear is legal~

Grizzly bears are well known for ripping stumps apart, turning over logs and boulders, and digging into frozen ground in search of food. Early on, pioneers learned that grizzly bears are not good tree climbers. However, if a man did not climb a big enough tree, the grizzly would simply push the tree over. A grizzly is a natural born weight-lifter. 
 
In the early 1800's, hunters learned that, if you were not in a tree or tree-stand high enough, the tiger would simply leap up and grab the hunter. Tigers are very agile and accomplished jumpers.  
 
Neither man nor beast can be both. If you take a look at weight-lifters Paul Anderson, Mark Henry, and Hossein Rezazadeh, you will realize that none of these champions could win a matal in a high jump or a long jump. Neither could a grizzly. And the tiger is not a weight-lifter.

Only when other prey cannot be found, will a tiger resort to hunting bears. Tigers kill Asiatic black bears and grizzlys ( Ursus arctos ). Of course, tigers only go after females, cubs, and young juvenile males. As with most predators, the tiger can read his quarry. He can spot the sick, the injured, and the very old. The tiger might risk making an ambush attack on a big male grizzly that is the equivalent of an 80 year old man. But, I am sure that a tiger is intelligent enough not to ever attack a healthy male grizzly. In a face to face encounter, a 500 pound female grizzly could defeat a 500 pound tiger.  
 
I am not here to disrespect the tiger. I believe that, next to Ursus arctos, the tiger is the top preator in his domain and could take on a lion at least 6 out of 10 fights.

Mr animalia, amur tigers, most usually, are MUCH smaller than 850 lbs, and of course, the largest specimen in scientific studies was FAR smaller than this. While i believe they can reach such weights, there is no reliable document confirming this. 
 
And, Toby Ross, not only is a 500 lb female grizzly bear exceptional, but it cannot defeat a 500 lb tiger, an animal with nearly the most fulminating form of that instantaneous outburst energy as compared with any other animal, with the exception of the lion. 
 
Likewise, grizzly bears, in general, are no larger than lions or tigers, and most certainly, the big cats are of greater aggression, with higher levels of testosterone. 
 
The big cats are also the more agile specimens. And, in one study, the lion had the largest recorded muscle mass, as compared with any other mammal in the study. 
 
A lion or tiger would defeat a grizzly bear. And also, Mr. animalia, a tiger (bengal) has been known to get up to 857 lbs in the wild.

And Toby Ross, while bears have been known to reach top speeds of 40 mph, most usually, they average about 30 mph, and the tiger, about 35 - 40 mph. The tiger is usually faster, though yes, it would seem the bear has much greater endurance.

Mr.Animalia / Mr.Damon...as I stated before. Cats evolved elastic muscles for quickness, flexibility, and spring-like muscles for jumping. 
 
Bears evolved heavier denser bones to hold heavy muscle for brute strength. A 600 pound Ursus arctos is far stronger that any 600 pound cat.  
 
As I asked, show me a long-jumper and/or high-jumper who is also a weight-lifter. You cannot have it both ways. 
 

As for running speed, Grizzly, tiger, lion are all about equal. Yes, a grizzly is usually running about 30 mph... and can keep this pace for miles. 
 
There is a difference between fast and quick. Example: a cheetah is faster than a leopard. A leopard is quicker than a cheetah.  
 
In a face-off, the tiger is the quicker fighter, but the brute strength of Ursus Arctos will prevail. I believe that a tiger could usually win in a lion / tiger fight. But, that is not ( to me ) worth an argument.  
 

Toby Ross, here`s where your mistake lies: Lions and tigers have enormously dense bones, and one study indicates the bones of the lion is as dense as those of the brown bear. 
 
The bones of the lion is immensely dense. And no, a 600 lb grizzly is not stronger than a 600 lb lion or tiger. That`s bull. Strength is based upon percentage of muscle, muscle cross section, which in turn is related to the size of the animal, as well as the percentage of muscle fibers used in any given movement.

And also, the tiger is slightly faster than both the grizzly and the lion. 
 
Likewise, the tiger would most likely lose, in a fight with a lion.

SHOW ME. 
 
Show me an Olympic high jumper / long jumper who also won medals in the heavyweight weight lifting event.  
 
You cannot, because it is scientifically impossible to have both flexible spring-like muscles and pure brute strength. If a lion or a tiger had the brute strength of a grizzly, the big cat would not be able to accomplish such incredible jumps.

Toby Ross, you obviously understand very little about muscles. No animal has more elastic muscles than any other. Lions are more agile, and can jump higher, because they have tendons which are only loosely connected to the bones, by the muscles. 
 
This facilitates greater mobility/maneuverability. Likewise, they have a very high percentage of muscle mass than most other animals of equal mass, meaning they have a greater percentage of muscle, to move a proportionately smaller mass (or mass as compared to muscle percentage). 
 
And, as for those studies?...why, here they are; 
 
http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/4338/bonedensity1ly8.png 
 
http://wildanimalelite.yuku.com/topic/51/t/Lions-density-of-bone.html 
 
Copy and paste the ENTIRE link into your browser, and check them out.

bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla. 
 
SHOW ME. Show me a long jumper / high jumper who is also a weight lifter in the heavyweight division. 
 
As I said, it is scientifically impossible to be both.  
 
Pound for pound, Ursus arctos is the strongest living carnivore.

Toby Ross, i myself can be considered a weight lifter (i work out frequently) and can also jump rather high. I only weigh about 139 lbs, but my biceps are impressive. Proof?; 
 
http://i640.photobucket.com/albums/uu130/boldchamp/boldchamppics005.jpg 
 
http://i640.photobucket.com/albums/uu130/boldchamp/m_912259b9bb0f4a199e8d2a42a62299dc.jpg 
 
I just showed the images, in case you did not believe me. I can also jump nearly to my head height, which is significant. 
 
But, did you look at those studies i showed you?...or, are you going to ignore them, like last time?....

YES i went to those sites and...they mean nothing. The proof is in the pudding. Book learning is great. But, a little common sense goes a long way. 
 
A Grizzly spends his days turning over fallen trees and heavy boulders. He digs in concrete hard frozen ground where a lion or tiger could only scratch the surface.  
 
No, you are not a professional or Olympic weight lifter. I am not saying that the big cats are not strong. I am saying that they do not have the brute strength of a grizzly. If a tiger had the muscles of a grizzly, he could not make such incredible leaps.  
 
In the early 1800's hunters used to sit in trees, ready to shoot a tiger. Several hunters were killed, when the tiger merely jumped up and grabbed them. 
 
People have been killed by grizzlys because they climbed trees to escape the bear. A grizzly is not a good climber. But, if the tree is not big enough, the grizzly would push the tree down.  
 
Different methods. The lions and tigers are powerful athletes. Ursus arctos is a brute. A 600 pound Ursus arctos is much stronger than a 600 pound tiger.  
 
So...you can prove me wrong by showing me this "Super Athlete" who is both a jumper and a heavyweight weight-lifter.

Toby Ross, yes, i`m not a professional weight lifter. But, one needs not be a professional weight lifter, to be a good one. 
 
And, the tiger being able to jump high, has nothing to do with his/her not having muscles like those of the grizzly. Muscles act in the same way, no matter which animal has it. The is not a great jumper, due to his build, not bone density or muscle mass. 
 
His limbs, for instance, is proportionately shorter than both those of the lion and tiger, as well as the fact he walks upon his whole foot, instead of of his toes, like the big cats, meaning a bear would lack that extra 'spring' the cats would have, from the simple fact that they are jumping from their toes, which effectively lengthens the stride, if only but a slight amount. Likewise, the limbs of the big cats is bent, while that of the bear is almost straight, allowing, again, little in the way of spring. 
 

Another point. 
 
Neither the lion nor the tiger is a fighter. Both are hunters and ambush killers. 
 
A fighter ( boxer or Olympic wrestler ) must have stamina. All cats lack the endurance to be a true fighter. Ursus arctos has brute strength and endurance.

tobby, lions and tigers not good fighters? another good joke. tigers and lions are the most skilled fighters alive . get out of youre dreamworld! tigers are 11.5x stronger then a men, a grizzly is 13.5x stronger then a men. That means a grizzly is only 1.18x stronger then a grizzly. i am comparing a 450 lb tiger with a 700 lb grizzly you know? that means pound for a tiger is more then 1.3x as strong as a grizzly. maybe in youre fantasy world bears are much stronger. just cause someone is good at jumping and running you will automaticly know that there not strong? NO! school is a good example, the ones who are good at running and jumping are usually the ones who are good in wrestling and weight lifting , because there muscles are good developped and they have strong and healthy bodies, those students are like tigers and lions. how could you possibly compare animals to athletes? a bear doesn't go work out in the gym every day because they wanto win a medal at the tournament of weight lifting. a tiger doesnt run on a treadmill daily to win the tournament of the 1000 meter run. 
 
in a fight between a 850 lb tiger vs 1000 lb grizzly, I calculated there strenght to be about equal. 
 
a tigers advantages: 
 
1-more skilled fighter 
 
2-much faster 
 
3-beter hunter 
 
4-sharper claws 
 
5-more muscular body 
 
6-cat like vission eyes. 
 
7-pound for pound stronger 
 
 
 
a grizzlies advantages: 
 
1-slightly heavier 
 
2-more endurance. 
 
 
 
clearly a tiger wins

a 675 lb tiger will easily kill a 750 lb grizzly. even a 450 lb tigress will be to much to handle for the bear.

anouther point: pound for pound the jaguar is the strongest predetor, the ursus actros is probably the fattest land predetor. if every mammal predetor would be the same size, panthera onca would be the king.

That was all pretty funny Mr.Animalia. Lions and tigers are not fighters. They are assassins. If a 600 pound tiger very carefully stalks a 600 pound Ursus arctos ( I use this proper name so you don't start crying wrong bear ) and ambushes the brown bear from behind, he might stand a 50% chance of killing the bear.  
 
We are not talking about school boys. Look at a real weight lifter, in the professional heavyweight division. Like Paul Anderson and Mark Henry. These men are built BIG all over.  
 
You are talking about an athlete like a swimmer or a boxer. Yes, these men are strong, but they are not the brutes like the weight lifters.  
 
Could you envision Mark Henry in a long jump or high jump compitition against professionals in that field? 
 
A fighter must have stamina. The big cats do not. They must do their work quickly. In a face to face encounter with a grizzly, neither lion nor tiger would stand even a remote chance of winning.  
 
SHOW ME. 
 
Where is this Super Athlete who is quick, agile, a fantastic jumper, and can win in a heavyweight division weight lifting contest? 
 
 
 

Toby Ross, lions and tigers are the most accomplished fighters out of all the land carnivora. Just check this vid out, of two lionesses fighting; 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o67eyP6zmpM 
 
Also, Mr. animalia, the two biggest cats (ions and tigers) as well as grizzlies, are of equal strength, being equal in weight, as well. 
 
Also, Toby, the big cats (specifically the lion and tiger) have the most fulminating form of that 'instantaneous' outburst of energy compared with any other animal yet studied, according to studies by george washington crile.  
 
I`ve already explained to you why the big cats are better leapers than bears, and still, you believe your bull crap.

Realistically, I would estimate that a 600 pound grizzly is about triple the strength of a 600 pound tiger. And yes, brown bears do work out. In their daily lives, these bears are overturning logs, fallen tress, and huge bouders. They easily overturn objects that no big cat could move. Plus, no big cat could dig into hard frozen ground. That hump you see on a grizzly is pure muscle.  
 
Pound for pound, Ursus arctos is the the world's strongest carnivore. The jaguar doesn't come close.

Im sorry damon, i know my name is lion man but all the big cats are my second fav, my first are bears espacally the brown bears. The largest wild brown bear was a kodiak found on kodiak island alaska, it weighed 2500lbs. So if you put the largest wild lion or tiger against the bear then the bear would kill them both. Just last year i was watching a grizzly bear and polar bear documentary on animal planet and the park ranger took the host to see a 1782lbs brown bear and the ranger said "He looks like he has grown a couple hundred pounds more since the last time i weighed him". Brown bears are much bigger and much stronger then any big cat of today. Even back in prehistoric times the largest cat that has ever lived, the american lin was no match for the short faced bear aka cave bear.

Toby Ross, a grizzly the size of a tiger would not be 3 times his strength. Not only is that not the case, for that to be true, they`d be stronger than an elephant, which is the strongest land animal. 
 
You greatly overestimate the strength of the bear, while underestimating that of the tiger/lion. Here is some insight, upon the strength of a bear, however; 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38q2fDtDDvM 
 
And, i`ve seen big cats dig into the ground, though yes, they are not good at it. But, this is due to build, rather than strength. The bear has longer, more blunt claws which work much like shovels. The legs are short, and stump like, which further aids in leverage. 
 
Likewise, turning over large boulders (which lions and tigers can still do) is something the big cats are not built for. They certainly have the strength for it, however. 
 
Pound for pound, the grizzly, or indeed Any bear, is most certainly not stronger than any member of the cat family.

To start with, I just have to say this. I am astounded! astonishished! amazed that anyone with more than a third grade education can actually believe that a lion or a tiger can possibly be as as strong as Ursus arctos! It is a rediculous statement.  
 
Sure, big cats can scratch the ground, but even if they had claws like a bear, a big cat would not have the muscle to dig into hard frozen ground. A grizzly overturns logs and boulders that neither lion nor tiger could budge.  
 
Your explanation of how cats jump don't cut it! Show me an athlete who is agile, quick, a superb jumper, and equiped for heavy weightlifting.  
 
The big cats are strong. I'm not trying to take that away. But, in a comparison with humans, your tiger is built like a boxer while the grizzly is built like the weight-lifter. George Foreman and Mike Tyson are strong, but not nearly as strong as Paul Anderson or Mark Henry. Ursus arctos is, pound for pound, easily the strongest carnivore. 
 
 
 

In prehistoreic times, there were cave lions in Europe and there were American lions. Both cats were slightly bigger than the Siberian tiger. In America, there was the short-faced bear ( Arctodus simus ) which was roughly 5 and a half feet tall at the shoulder. The American lion was no match for this bear. In Europe, there was the cave bear ( Ursus spelaeus ) which was roughly the size of a Kodiak bear, but even more heavily built. Pound for pound, the cave bear was probably the strongest land carnivore ever, even though he was mostly vegetarian. The cave lion wouldn't stand a chance in Hell against a cave bear. The biggest land carnivore ever was Ursus maritimus tyrannus, a prehistoric polar bear even bigger that Andrewsarcus! Bears are the apex carnivores.

Toby Ross, you greatly underestimate the strength of the big cats. And, what do you mean, my explanation of how big cats jump don`t cut it? 
 
For starters, you cannot compare the differences in abilities between members of the same species (humans: jumpers vs weight lifters), as you are comparing big cats vs bears. 
 
In a comparison of humans with jumpers vs professional weight lifters, yes, it would seem they have bigger muscles, a supplement to exercising. However, that is not an accurate comparison, as you are still comparing species within the same species, where one person can actually 'train' his body for a specific aspect. 
 
However, for animals in the wild, it`s different. Big cats, as do bears, are both designed for strength. The muscle mass of all these animals is rather high. 
 
A bear cannot jump as far as a big cat, simply because of his build, and not the weight of his muscles. The bear, simply put, has proportionately shorter, almost pillar-like legs, which allows almost no spring for a jump, which also requires that slight bend in the legs characteristic of all jumping animals, that effectively 'shortens' the leg before the jump, and, once straightened, allows a greater gain in distance. 
 
Bears also walk on their whole foot, rather than their toes, which further decreases jumping stride.  
 
Also, lion man, only certain populations of brown bears are larger than lions or tigers, as i have the documents which show that, at least in the case of the grizzly, and perhaps a small number of other brown bears, the size is rather equal between them. 
 
I also have records of lions killing both brown bears, and polar bears as well.

IF a tiger had the muscle mass of a grizzly, that tiger would be too bulked out to be an agile hunter and jumper.He would also have a very prominent hump on his shoulders. His limbs would be thick with muscles. That tiger would be Arnold Shwartzo-tiger. 
 
In a real face-off, no tiger and no lion could kill a brown bear or polar bear. Stop watching all of those faked You Tube "sites for idiots".

Toby Ross, the lion and tiger do indeed have as much muscle as the bear. However, the muscles of these specimens are more evenly spread out throughout various areas of the body. 
 
It just so happens that a greater proportion of the grizzly bears muscle mass, is in it`s shoulders, as compare with the big cats. 
 
I don`t rely on videos for the lion-tiger vs bear subject. I have actual studies and eyewitness accounts for that.

So, these ( very reliable ) eye witnesses are exactly where when they see tigers hunting polar bears? Or, if I remember right, it was lions hunting and killing polar bears.  
 
Ursus arctos is, pound for pound, stronger than a polar bear. And, a grizzly has thicker stronger muscles than a tiger EVERYWHERE.  
 
It is Damon and Animalia who are delusional. YOU read all of this so-called "cannot be wrong" data from some science Utopia, and you only remember what you choose to remember. But, one thing is very clear to me... 
 
I have been reading and learning from every source available since probably before your Daddy met your Mommy. Ursus arctos is pound for pound MUCH stronger that any cat that ever lived.

Toby Ross, name one study you have read, which indicates the grizzly has more muscle as compared with the lion and tiger. 
 
And, the bear does not have 'thicker, stronger' muscles everywhere. The grizzly bear averages roughly 193 kg, with an average chest girth of 130.5 cm. That of lions, which averaged 193.3 kg, was 125.9 cm, but slightly different, and due to the fact the bear has a shorter form (in both height and length). A shorter body of equal mass would need to be of greater girth.

Tigers sometimes hunt bears. This is only when easier food cannot be found. This is also much more often Asiatic black bear and sloth bear. Even with these, the tigers seeks out females and juveniles. When a tiger hunts brown bears, he definately seeks out a smaller female or a very young juvenile.  
 
I doubt very seriously that tigers ever attack a healthy fully grown boar brown bear. Not even in an ambush attack. If this has ever happened, the bear was very old or very sick. The tiger is quite capable of "reading" his quarry.  
 
I believe that, even in an ambush attack by a tiger, a healthy male Ursus arctos would kill the tiger.  
 
 
 

In those measurements, you were very careful to go withy the "inland grizzlies". Measure the muscles of a 600 pound brown bear, before he starts fattening up for Winter, against a 600 pound tiger.

*I am from the Old School. Stop talking in metric. Speak English.

I happened to see on TV just recently, a coastal grizzly that was mounted after some Elmer Fudd had shot it. It had a 28 inche biceps. There is no way in HELL that a tiger has an equal muscle mass with a grizzly of equal size. 
 
Another point. A 600 pound tiger is a bigger animal than a 600 pound grizzly, because the bear has heavier muscles and heavier bones. It should be by body length. A tiger with seven foot body length vs grizzly with a seven foot body length. The grizzly would then outweigh the tiger because he is more heavily packed with strong bones and muscle.

Toby, i was strictly talking of grizzly bears, in my size comparison. Though i have sources from several different areas, of grizzlies, where the figures were the same.  
 
While some populations of brown bears can and often do get larger, this is based more upon food intake, rather than actual body size. 
 
The muscles of a 600 lb bear would be proportionately lesser than those of a 430 lb bears. Simply put, the bigger bear will have more muscle, but, relative to the weight of his body, he`ll have less muscle. Muscle mass decreases in proportion to body weight, as the animal increases in mass. 
 
But, you said, that, pound for pound, the bear would still be stronger. Of course a much larger bear will have more muscle mass. Just as a tiger larger than a bear will have more muscle. However, what about at equal weights (only referring to lions-tigers and brown bears)?. 
 

Also, Toby, you said that bear had a 28 inch bicep?...well, here is a record of a tiger, of 440 lbs, with a 27.5 inch bicep; 
 
http://s277.photobucket.com/albums/kk45/brentlion_2008/?action=view&current=tigergirthweight2.png 
 
Here is a tiger with 29 inch biceps, that weighed 508 lbs; 
 
http://s277.photobucket.com/albums/kk45/brentlion_2008/?action=view&current=tigergirthweight3.png 
 
I have many more than that. So, you were saying? 

Well, let's have a look. The record tiger has a 27.5 inche bicep. An average grizzly chosen randomly has a 28 inche bicep. Hmmmmmmmm?  
 
Is is not becoming obvious to you now?

That`s not a record tiger, Toby. I meant, i was merely showing you A record, or document concerning the tiger`s measurements, which were rather average. Did you see my second source, of the 508 lb tiger, with the 29 inch biceps? 
 

Speaking of obvious. Do you notice that this fight reads "Siberian tiger vs grizzly bear"? These people had reason for that. They chose the biggest tiger against what might be ( according to Damon and Animalia ) the smallest brown bear. Why didn't they say Ursus arctos vs Panthera tigris? Sounds to me like they wish to give your tiger every possible advantage. And they did the same thing with the gorilla. Why no0t simply, tiger vs gorilla? Is someone a little nervous that the tiger needs to be a giant?

Grizzly bears, on more than one account, used to burst into log houses in the North West at the smell of food cooking. They would sometimes burst through a door or right through a wall. 
 
I cannot recall ever hearing of a tiger doing that. But then, a tiger does not have the bear's brute strength.

I do not believe in de-clawing any animal. But, for the sake of arguement, If a de-clawed tiger, of equal size to the grizzly, slaped a grizzly upside the head, he would rattle the grizzly just enough to make the bear really angry. If the de-clawed grizzly slaped the tiger upside of his head, the tiger would likely have a crushed skull, a broken neck, or both.

toby, tigers and lions are the most skilled fighters on the planet. bears don't hunt, or very rarly they do. all what tiger does is hunt. if a grizzly was 5x as strong as a tiger (which it is not) a grizzly would be as stronger as 3 ton rhino. a grizzly is much weaker then a rhino. a tiger is by far more muscle then a grizzly. you are overestimating bears and underestimating tigers. and stop comparing animals to athletes! like I said, they are 2 total different things animals dont work out every day at the gym 
 
the tiger is pound for pound stronger, more muscle, much faster, much better fighter, more deadly weapon and more experience hunting. 
 
the grizzly is slightly heavier and has more endurance. and then, the bears weight is not going to come in hand, tigers take down prey much bigger then a grizzly. and its endurance, well the tiger will finish the grizzly with little effort. 
 
tiger wins 9 out of 10

and toby, when did i ever say that the grizzly was the smallest brown bear? I said kodiak and russian bears are much bigger; but i never said the grizzly was the smallest! 
 
and bengal or siberian doesn't matter, tiger will still kill the grizzly

Ok mr animalia and damon you are saying that a lion and a tiger fight better then a grizzly bear!!! WHAT ARE YOU SAYING!!! Watch these videos of grizzly bears fighting and picture what would happen to a lion or tiger. 
 
 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGwUpM9QryU 
 
 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFtAEM7GkO4&feature=channel 
 
 
 
A grizzly would rip a lion or tiger apart!!

Lion man, the bear is not a better fighter than the lion or tiger. I have actual studies concerning the fighting prowess of the lion, as well as studies indicating bears most usually avoid fights, as well as the fact that mortality of bears, due to fighting, is less than that reported for lions. 
 
Check this vid out, of lions fighting; 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o67eyP6zmpM 
 
The results of most fights often end in the death of one or more opponents, according to studies by packer. Here is another vid; 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cMk5d0RnT4&feature=related 
 
The lion and tiger also have a greater proportion of testosterone, as compared with the grizzly bear, with indicates greater aggressive behavior. Likewise, studies by george washington Crile indicates the lion and tiger has the most fulminating form of that instantaneous outburst of energy of any animal of comparable size, including the grizzly. Note i am not talking of endurance, but that instant outburst of energy some animals get when call upon.

You are right Mr.Animalia. And, if you will keep up, you would know that I have stated that I did over exaggerate. In truth, the grizzly is only 2 or 3 times stronger than a tiger. In a fight, if the tiger does not kill the bear within the first few seconds, the grizzly will easily win. A big cat is only good for a few seconds, then he is winded. Sure, he has that sudden burst of energy, like a person on speed. But then, the tiger is huffing and puffing, while the stronger grizzly still has hours of energy left.  
 
The tiger has only one chance to win this fight against a much more powerful opponent. The tiger must get a strong grip on the grizzly bears throat within the first few seconds of the fight. But, that isn't going to happen. Grizzly bears are fighters. Male grizzly bears spend a great deal of time fighting. Experiance will keep this from happening. The grizzly will have an easy victory over the less powerful tiger.  
 
Oh, and Damon, those figures mean absolutely nothing. You say that a grizzly is only 1.18 times as strong as a tiger. Buffalo chips! Measuring animal strength is not an exact science. The bear or tiger has no clue what is happening. How can you know when the animal is giving all it has in a strength contest? You cannot. But from all that I have read, since I started reading about 53 years ago, the grizzly is by far the stronger of the two.

I was just reading at a site about tigers. At this paticular site, someone was asking about tiger vs brown bear. Of course, what he recieved was pretty much a slap in the face.  
 
I do not own a gun. I do not kill anything other than roaches and other creepy crawlies that infest my home. I will even catch and release such things as spiders and wasps that I can catch in my house. I do not kill snakes. I love nature and even refuse to fish. 
 
However, man has asked "who is the King of Beasts" from back in the stone age. It is a very natural curiosity. I would never agree to an actual pit fight. I give ( when possible ) to the WWF. 
 
But, we are looked upon as monsters.

My way of looking at this forum is like this, IF every living thing on earth were transplanted to another earth-like planet ( by highly advanced aliens ) where there is only one great continent, who would be at the top of the food chain? 
 
North pole = polar bear. 
 
Ocean = sperm whale / Orca. 
 
From the sub-actic to the sub-tropics = Ursus arctos. 
 
Jungle = tiger. 
 
Dry arid grassland = lion.

Toby Ross, if an animal is properly motivated, he can be coaxed to use his full strength.  
 
But, i don`t think the grizzly is stronger at all. You didn`t see me say 1.18 times, or anything like that. The grizzly is not stronger, for reasons i gave before. 
 
No amount of reading will tell you the strength of the grizzly bear,especially when only but one study actually exists of the strength of the grizzly, and it is fairly recent. 
 
Lions or tigers are every bit as strong as a grizzly. Indeed, if a grizzly was 3 times stronger than a lion or tiger, it would be the strongest land animal. Even elephants, though rather strong, are not that strong. 
 
An elephant is roughly 20 times as strong as the average adult human.  
 

NO Damon! Measuring bite-force or animal strength is NOT a disciplined science.  
 
Tigers not only hunt big game, but will also eat small animals, such as rodents or lizards. But, you never see a tiger overturning heavy logs or boulders. A tiger lacks the muscle to dig into frozen ground. Have you ever heard of a tiger pushing down a tree to get at a person or a potential meal? Have you ever heard of a tiger bursting into a house to get at food? Have you ever heard of a tiger ripping the door off of a car? NO! Tigers do not have the brute strength of a grizzly.

You will notice that I speak of things that can be seen on nature programs by everyone or can be found on the history channel by anyone. As for your "data". I believe that if you find 10 articles refering to a comparison of strength between Ursus arctos and Panthera tigris, and seven articles read that the bear is the strongest, and three articles read that the tiger is the stronger, you will show us the three.

Toby Ross, if i found a study concerning the strength comparison of the tiger and bear, i would show all. I`m not biased.  
 
But, i also do not hold much significance to studies which just says one is stronger than the other. I`d rather rely upon an actual comparison, because indeed, i believe they are rather equal in strength. 
 
And, i never said measuring bite force or strength was a disciplined science. However, you can produce good results, by testing the animal several times, rather than merely one, as well as giving him/her a high incentive to do it.

Those who believe that the big cats rule over bears are forever bringing up the fact that tigers hunt bears. Yes they do. But, I seriously dougbt that tigers ever hunt healthy full grown male brown bears. Then, there is the fact that brown bears very rarely hunt. A grizzly will not kill another predator for food. But, if he does kill a predator for any other reason, then he will devour that predator. Other than an occasional attack on elk or carribou, grizzly bears mostly eat rodents, rabbits, and fish. Vegetation makes up the biggest majority of a brown bears diet. If brown bears were true hunters, then we would be hearing stories of bears killing tigers. The hunter always has the advantage, because the prey is taken by surprize.

Toby Ross, my statements that a tiger would win in a fight with a grizzly bear, has nothing to do with tigers hunting bears. I do indeed know that most cases of tigers hunting bears happened through ambush. However, the tiger, along with the lion, has the most fulminating form of that instantaneous outburst of energy of any animal of comparable size, including the bear. Likewise, they have higher levels of testosterone, and certainly are the more aggressive specimens, and likewise more agile. 
 
The lion or tiger would most certainly win.

The tiger does indeed have some advantages. Quickness. A loud fast attack. Sharper teeth. Sharp blade-like meat hooks. But testosterone? I doubt it. Grizzly males are very aggressive towards each other. That is why males are so much bigger than females.  
 
If this fight is face-to-face, then that sudden outburst of attack will not take the grizzly by surprize. And... Ursus arctos is the stronger of the two. I have stated my reasons for knowing this. Pound for pound, the brown bear is the worlds strongest land carnivore. 
 
 
 

Bite Force. We constantly get conflicting reports. Most authorities say that alligators and crocodiles have the strongest bite force of any living animal. Now, others are saying that sharks have an even stronger bite. Have they also measured the bite force of the hippo, the orca, and the sperm whale? One several programs, I saw where the grizzly has a stronger bite force than even a wolf, and much stronger than that of a lion or tiger. Now, I am seeing reports that the big cats have a stronger bite that a grizzly.  
 
I believe that, in any type of measuring animal strength, you get what that animal is willing to give you at the moment. You cannot be sure that you got all that the animal can give.

Toby Ross, you can indeed coax an animal to use his full bite force...if he is accurately stimulated. 
 
And, you should also know that, on most programs, and in some articles, estimates of bite forces are given (which explains the confusion). However, brady barr actually measured the bite forces of many animals. Here are the results; 
 
Bite force, in lbs; 
 
Young male lion (3.7 - 4 years old approximately) 691 lbs  
 
Great white shark: 669 lbs 
 
Alligator snapping turtle: 1004 lbs 
 
Crocodile: 2500 - 5000 lbs, first measurement from a big, but tired croc, second from another. 
 
And, from another study (no estimates) 
 
The alligator has also been measured with a strong bite force; 
 
http://dogbitesinformationandstatistics.blogspot.com/2008/01/canine-bite-force.html 
 
"According to a recent study published in the Journal of Zoology of London, alligators snap their strong jaws shut with a force of 2,125 pounds, or with about as much force as a mid-size sedan falling on top of someone." 
 
And, here is more bite forces from brady barr; 
 
African wild dog: 317 lbs 
 
Pitbull: 235 lbs 
 
German shepherd: 238 lbs 
 
Rottweiler: 328 lbs 
 
Human: 127 lbs 
 
Hyacinth Mccaw: 167 lbs 
 
Monitor lizard: 55 lbs 
 
Python: 32 lbs 
 
Hyena: 1000 lbs 
 
Tasmanian devil: 395 lbs 
 
wolf: 406 lbs 
 
Female hippo: 1823 lbs 
 
Those are the bite force measurements. As can be seen, Crocs and alligators have the strongest bite force measurements.

Also, Toby Ross, i have an actually study upon the testosterone of grizzly bears, which was but slightly over 1 ng/ml, compared to twice, or nearly twice that amount, in lions or tigers. 
 
So, i have the data to back up my claim....otherwise, i wouldn`t have said it.

It would be interesting to know the bite strength of a bull hippo, an orca, and a sperm whale. Whalers told stories of bull sperm whales crushing boats in their jaws. Of course, sailors have a reputation of telling tall tales. Is there any reliable evidence, that you know of, about the bite force of the grizzly, tiger, lion, and jaguar? Also, on one nature program, they claimed that the gorilla has an equal bite force with the grizzly.

Toby Ross, i already told you the bite force of the lion, which was measured by brady barr. You have to read my posts, man. 
 
Also, frank mendel has told me, via email, that he has recently measured he bite force of a couple of tigers...however, since he plans to publish the data, he cannot yet give me any info on it. 
 
But, the jaguar`s bite force, and neither has that of the grizzly, ever been measured, only estimated at.

I read the article. They measured the bite force of ONE young lion. You yourself said that when measuring the strength, speed, intelligence of a single individual the evidence is inconclusive. And yes, the bite force of both the grizzly and the gorilla have been measured, but maybe not by those that you view as the "Gods of Science".  
 
You keep looking at data from some lab while I am looking at the animals themselves. Leave Data in the starship Enterprize and look at the tiger and look at the grizzly. The3 grizzly bear is far stronger than the tiger.

Toby Ross, you never said that you cannot measure the strength, speed, ect, of just one animal. I said that you cannot merely measure the bite force only once....and indeed, the bite force of that lion was taken once. 
 
And, the grizzly is not stronger than the lion. Also, you cannot tell the strength of an animal just by looking at it. Only an actual study/comparison can determine that. And, the grizzly is not stronger than the tiger. 
 
And no, the bite force of the gorilla and grizzly was not measured. The only sources i`ve seen so far on these specimens, has been estimates.

I believe that, to get a more accurate measurement, the bite force of 10 or 12 young healthy lions should be measured. Then take an average. Do the same with tigers. With grizzlys, first consider the size differances, and take an average. Then, take the bite force of 10 or 12 bears all of average size. Then take an average.  
 
What if aliens took just one human to measure strength, intelligence, etc. They might have Danny Devito or they might have Lou Ferrigno. That would be inconclusive evidence.  
 
 
 

I look at lions and tigers and I look at Ursus arctos. I look at what the big cats can do, and I look at what the big bears can do. My conclusion is: The grizzly is from 2 to 3 times stronger than a lion or a tiger.

toby ross, you cant just gues an animals strenght, go do some research and you will find that tigers are stronger then grizzies. a 700 lb grizzly is 1.18x as strong as a 450 lb tiger. and experts CAN calculate the power of an animal, scannimg them, calculate there body mass, muscle %, fat % ect...and they will get a very close result. that means that pound for pound a tiger is 1.3x as strong. the tiger is by far the better fighter and more skilled hunter,more deadly weapons, pound for pound more stronger, superb jumper, and much faster. IF the grizzly has the guts to fight the tiger he will RIP. the grizzly is smart, so it would not defend its prey and run away. like you said animals are about suviver not ego and "im the strongest".

Mr.Animalia...you make me laugh.  
 
You copy data from Damon's secrete Fortress of Solitude, believing that anything he says is ABSOLUTE TRUTH because he tells you it is.  
 
Ursus arctos is from 2 to 3 times stronger than any big cat livig and at least double the strength of any prehistoric cat.  
 
Cats are flexible, agile, and quick. A BEAR is STRENGTH and POWER.

The tiger will lose because after just a few seconds of fighting, the big cat is winded. The grizzly will walk away bleeding from the cat's claws. But, his wounds will quicly. So, the big brown bear ambles away from the broken body of the tiger.

Toby Ross....you cannot really judge the strength of these animals based on what you believe they can, or cannot do. Even a moderately strong human can turn over a fairly big boulder, and most certainly any big cat can do it. 
 
But, bears can do some things that cats can`t, not due to greater strength, but build.  
 
I`ve seen a lion bend, with apparent ease, a solid metal rode holding a dummy in place. I`ve also seen a tiger take a dummy of 60 lbs, and handle it as if it were a rag doll.

Also, Toby, mr. animalia did not copy anything from me. Generally, and i will always support this view, regardless of the crap you spew, the lion-tiger and grizzly bear, are of equal strength. 
 
Cats are flexible and agile because they have bodies built for just that.....but, you can be strong and flexible too. If you don`t understand how this works, i`ll be happy to explain it. But, i assure you....you are wrong. 
 
A grizzly is not stronger than a lion or tiger, and most certainly not 3 times stronger, as it would then be stronger than an elephant, the strongest land animal.

toby ross, i agree with you 100%. In ancient times in the colosium, they had animal fights. They had fights between several animals including the lion, tiger, brown bear etc. When they had the lion or tiger fight the bear, the bear would mostly always win 7-9 times out of 10. The only time when the lion or tiger won is when the bear was sick or old or just to young to have the fighting experience. But when they matched them up with a big bear with a big lion or tiger, the lion an tiger wouldnt want to fight because the bear would size them up first then go in for the kill.

lion man, there is but little proof that fights between lions-tigers and grizzly bears took place, and there is certainly no 'reliable' documents which showed they had won. 
 
A lion or tiger, of equal size as compared with the grizzly, and greater aggression, as well, would be the usual winners.

Thank you, Lion Man. In just a bit more recent history, in Old California, when owned by Spain, the people had animal fights in a big arena. These people kept records of each and every fight. The champion killer beast was a Mexican grizzly. Before they aquired the grizzly, they had various champion beasts which would last a few days to a few weeks. But, the grizzly fought regulary for several years until the sport was outlawed. The same grizzly killed several big bulls, a number of lions and tigers. Nothing that they could catch or purchase could stand against a full grown male grizzly.

No prob toby ross, the grizzly bear is my fav animal and IS the biggest and strongest land carnivore. Think about it damon, the polar bears evolution starts with brown bears, and all brown bears evolution start with the largest and strongest land mammal canivore the short faced bear and the cave bear. The tiger for instance evolves from a sabor toothed cat which wasnt huge, it just had large teeth is all and not that strong of a bit force. The lion evolves from the american lion and the cave lion which is much larger and stronger than any sabor toothed cat and about the same size as ligers, and sometimes bigger. So the grizzly has it in its DNA to be the biggest and strongest land mammal carnivoe in the world. Oh and short face bears were known to take wooly mammoths down single handed, and not just every now and then either.

Ok don't get me wrong but I have to wonder, where the hell are you getting your information from lion man? 
 
Tigers did not evolve from saber-tooth cat the tiger and the saber tooth cat are big cats but they were of different subspecies, neither did the modern day lion come from the cave/American lion, BTW the American lion MIGHT be a new world tiger. The closest relative to the saber tooth cat is the clouded leopard not the tiger. 
 
Nor did the grizzly bear evolved from the short nosed bear. Spectacled Bear evolved from short nose bear dumb ass. And how could short nosed bear kill a wooly mammoth and they weren’t even hunters they usually stole from smaller animal’s dire wolf/saber tooth cat/ American lion or ate the decay or ate smaller animals but there is no way the short nosed bear could have killed a full grown healthy wooly mammoth so quite making up stories in your sick fantasy world, man dumbest shit I’ve ever read. And short nose bear had very thin bones even a jaguar bone density is thicker all that bear had was size and maybe speed but that’s it. 
 
So I ask out of curiosity where the hell are you getting this information form lion man, it barely makes sense. 
 
And toby you are just being very stupid when you agreed with that non sense lion man post 
 
And the brown bear did not come from cave bears but it was a close relative ass.

It's like this Rick, Lion Man might have gotten his evolution a little twisted, but the short-faced bear was the apex preator in America in the Ice Age. In Europe, the usually vegetarian cave bear could easily take a meal from any cave lion. Ursus arctos was then and still is today superior to any of the big cats.

Ursus spalaeus, the cave bear was, pound for pound, the strongest carnivore that ever lived. He was as tall as Ursus arctos ( 10 feet tall ) and weighed from 800 to 2200 pounds. No cave lion or saber-toothed cat could stand up to this bear. In America, Arctodus simus, the short-faced bear stood 5 feet and 3 inches tall ( average ) at the shoulder. He could easily kill an American lion. Ursus arctos migrated from Europe to America where he became the apex predator of both lands. He still is.

When I was stationed in Key West, Florida ( marines ) in 1969, I read a book that one of my GI buddies loaned me. It was a copy of the California animal fights records, translated into English. That grizzly killed cougars, black bears, jaguars, lions, tigers, and bulls, and bison. He won every match he had until the killings were outlawed. *THAT is history.

Damon. You keep running to these nerds in Frankensteins lab who are looking at bones and tissue under a microscope. If a fight could be won like that, then why put 2 boxers in a ring? Just give them a check-up and let the doctor announce the winner. OPEN your eyes and look at the animals. Look at what they can do. The big cats cannot copy the feats of strength of a grizzly. Sure, they're quicker, they can jump higher. But a tiger is no where near as strong as a grizzly.  
 
You have said that a lion or a tiger could overturn the same logs and boulders as a grizzly. I say bovine droppings! And the tiger could only scatch the suface of frozen ground. I will still say that Ursus arctos is double or perhaps triple the strength of any big cat of equal size.

Toby Ross, who said anything about people in labs who looks at bones, and what not? 
 
You obviously do not know much about science, to have said such a thing. I`m talking about a study of live animals, not dead. 
 
And indeed, i know what these animals can do. The big cats are every bit as strong. And, if you notice, the big cats and bears have a different build, different shaped claws, ect....that`s why the bear could do certain things, and the cats can`t, and vice versa. 
 
But, you obviously know little about strength, or how an animal comes to be strong. A lion or tiger is roughly 10 times as strong as an average human. A grizzly bear, of equal weight, will not be stronger than that. 
 
Strength, as i`ve told you, is based upon the actual percentage of muscle an animal has, the muscle cross section, which in turn is related to size, as well as the amount of muscle fibers used in any given movement. 
 
Do your research man.

There is also quality of muscle. I have known men who are small-built who were stronger than much bigger men with bigger muscles. Cats have elastic muscle for flexibility. Bears have hard muscle for brute strength. Add this to the fact that a grizzly has bigger, heavier, denser bones than a tiger. Bigger bones for bigger muscle which is also muscle for quality strength. I believe that you are being totally rediculous in saying that a tiger is stronger than a grizzly. That is an absurd statement.  
 
You are realizing that the tiger's speed and flexibility is not enough to defeat the bear. So, you will tell tall tales about the tiger being stronger than a grizzly. I believe that most children above the age of 5 knows better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38q2fDtDDvM

http://en-allexperts.com/q/Interspecies-Conflict-3754/2009/4/strongest-animal-earth.htm

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Interspecies-Conflict-3754/hi-16.htm

Toby Ross, i`ve recently shown that vid, already. Do you even look at the links i show? 
 
If you are not going to follow my posts, or view the links i show, what use is it for you to reply to a post you haven`t looked at properly? 
 

Toby, the muscles of the big cats, have nothing to do with flexibility. It is the lose construction of their tendons (being connected to the bones, by the muscles). Likewise, the agility of these specimens is due to the fact they have a greater percentage of fast twitch muscle fibers. 
 
The muscles of the lion or tiger is no more flexible than those of the bear. 
 
Check these vids out; 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DHSRPUOb7g 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RT553gLyV4

I have been reading your stuff. Now, so far as I can understand, you watched that one video where the grizzly showed us what a tiger cannot do. But, I have sent out more than this one and NEVER got a comment on any of them.  
 
You hear yourself. You try to explain your misconceptions, and refuse to hear what I have explained. Some people have different quality muscles than others. NOT all muscle tissue is alike. Tigers have a lighter skeleton with less dense bones than bears. Upon this lighter skeleton is attached a lighter more flexible muscle system. IF you cannot understnd this, try opening your eyes and actually look at tigers and brown bears.

Did you go to the last 2 sites. Everywhere I look ( besides blogs and amature videos ) all experts and all professionals agree that Ursus arctos is stronger than a lion or a tiger. Everywhere... except for you look long and hard for the hard to find people who make outlandish claims about big cats and bears.  
 
If you actually showed ALL from both sides, the evidence would be clear. Ursus arctos is the worlds strongest and most powerful land predator: the apex land carnivore.

Toby, i don`t agree with any site or expert that states the bear is stronger, with no actual study to back it up. Was the strength of the grizzly as compared with the lion-tiger ever compared?....no, so, you cannot say with any certainty that the grizzly is stronger. 
 
I also do not pay much attention to the allexperts website, in which almost anyone can become an 'expert'...even a high school student, and the site actually says the info you receive is not professional.  
 
Why would i follow a site of that nature?...particularly when some of the answers from the 'experts' i`ve seen were purely wrong.

I saw your tiger and your lion attack a dummy? There was no show of strength there, like toppling a dumpster end over end without effort. I was not impressed. Your last message starts out: "I don't agree with any site or expert that states the bear is stronger". Unquote. I believe that much of your last message.  
 
You come to this site with this rediculous claim. You skip over more learned info than you want to show.

Toby, why did you only copy the part of my post that you wanted to see?...i said more than that. I don`t merely trust estimates....there must be an actual study that proves it, for it to hold any merit. 
 
I don`t skip over any info, unless if has no actual proof of the statement, I show only actual studies that proves the data they present. Isn`t that much more reliable?

The proper way to measure 2 animals for strength contest or a fight, if you want a fair match. As follows. Measure, with each animal on all fours. From the center of the chest to the rear of the animal. Neck, tail, and head not included. The more powerful animal will be the hreaviest. That is why choosing by weight would give the lighter built animal a distinct advantage.

All of the most reliable sites that I can find claims that the grizzly is stronger than any big cat. All of them! Except in blogs which I refuse to read.  
 
So, you are expecting me to believe that EVERYTHING you can find says that the big cats are stronger than Ursus arctos?

Another way, from a different point of view, collect the weight of each sub-species of living tiger. Get an average. Collect the weight of every living sub-species of Ursus arctos. Take an average. Then pit the grizzly and tiger at the proper weight of each individual.

Toby, where did i say the big cats were stronger?...i said they were equal in strength, if i`m not mistaken. 
 
And, i already compared the weight of all subspecies of tiger, and all those of grizzly bears.....there was little difference. In fact, what difference there was, was actually in favor of the tiger, but this is due to the fact that some populations of tigers were baited, and usually only a limited number of specimens were weighed, which often gives biased results. 
 

I do NOT believe you. I will take an average myself. I do NOT believe that you included the Kodiak, the Coastal grizzly, or the Coastal Siberian brown bears. I will start in the morning doing an average of each sub-species of tiger. Then get the weight of the average Panthera tigris. I will do the same with Ursus arctos.

Toby, kodiacks are brown bears, as are the coastal variety, and not grizzlies. So no, i did not include them. 
 
And, i do not think you have the data for every population of tigers (this should only include siberians and bengals, the two biggest variety) or even every sub-species, as most sites only give but a 'guesstimate', and of course, not all are available through the web, even though i do have every modern document on the subject, and i`m not lying. 
 
 
 

No. Sorry. It doesn't work like that. You and Mr.Animalia started tossing in the exploits tigers other than Siberian. That made this fight become Panthera tigris vs Ursus Arctos.  
 
I use the term "grizzly" now as simply the common name often used for any member of Ursus arctos. But, this is about tiger vs grizzy aka Ursus arctos.  
 
Why should I allow you to have both the Siberian and Bengal, the 2 biggest tigers, but I am restricted from the biggest grizzlys?

OK. You get an average of each male tiger: Siberian, Bengal, Indochinese, Malayan, Sumatran, and South China.

Toby, any other sub species of tigers, other than bengals and siberians, are too small. We are speaking only of those closely resembling in weight. 
 
A kodiak bear is not a grizzly, neither is a coastal brown bear, so, not being grizzlies, they aren`t the biggest grizzlies. The siberian tiger is panthera tigris althica, while the bengal tiger is panthera tigris tigris....use their proper names. 
 

Get me an average of each male grizzly. Eurasian B.B. / Kamchatka B.B. / Siberian B.B. / Inland grizzly / Coastal grizzly / Himalayan B.B. / Brown Bear ( black grizzly )/ Kodiak Bear / Tibetan Blue Bear / Syrian B.B.

The Bengal is NOT a Siberian!  
 
YOU do not understand this. Many naturalists ( as I watch them often ) refer to any/all species of brown bear as "grizzly". But, regardless of this... 
 
When you and Animalia started talking about tigers killing gaur, elephants, rhino, sloth bear, etc. ,You made this Panthera tigris vs Ursus arctos. Period.  
 
Yes, that means the smaller tiger too. And yes, Kodiak and all other brown bears.

Weight of average adult male Panthera tigris... 
 
Weight of average adult male Ursus arctos... 
 
*Be honest.

Toss in...the average weight of the average adult male lion. That cool cat is forever being tossed into the mix.

Oh, Damon...YES I do pay attention to your posts. Just because I do not agree with your rediculous statements, dosn't mean I'm not paying attention.  
 
Now, you were talking about measuring muscle mass on these animals by percentage. Did you take under consideration the much smaller frame of the lion/tiger?  
 
And I still believe that, if you really wish to decide which is stronger, measure the animals so that both have the same body length. If you go by weight, you give the smaller built animal a distinct advantage. If we were to go according to height, we would simply be favoring the one with the longest legs.  
 
A grizzly with a 7 foot body length would be heavier and stronger than a tiger with a 7 foot body length. This is because the grizzly has a bigger frame, heavier bones, and more muscle mass.

It's funny when I go back and read it. You wish to use only the 2 biggest species of tiger, while you want me to use only the smaller Ursus arctos. 
 
Taking an average of each sub-species would determine the size of the average tiger vs average brown bear. Or, to make this a perfectly even match, get a weight of each at the same body length.

Siberian - 500 pounds. 
 
Bengal - 490 pounds.  
 
Indochinese - 420 pounds. 
 
Malayan - 265 pounds. 
 
Sumatran - 300 pounds. 
 
South China - 330 pounds. 
 
Average tiger weighs - 385 pounds.

I could not find a weight for the Himalayan brown bear or the Tibetan brown bear. 
 
Eurasian b.b. - 380 pounds. 
 
Kamchatka b.b. - 1000 pounds. 
 
E.Siberian b.b. - 1000 pounds. 
 
Inland grizzly - 400 pounds. 
 
coastal grizzly - 700 pounds.  
 
Ussuri b.b. - 1000 pounds.  
 
Kodiak - 1200 pounds.  
 
Syrian b.b. - 420 pounds. 
 
Average brown bear - 762.5 pounds. 
 
 
 

As a species, Ursus arctos is bigger and stronger than Panthera tigris. We have a 385 pound tiger vs a 762 pound brown bear.  
 
I'll bet that, if we were to take a brown bear and a tiger, measured by body length, we would get a similar weight difference.

Damon, you can do your own average weights of each tiger and brown bear species. But, I believe that I have now proved that Ursus arctos is the apex land carnivore. 
 
I do not know how to get a weight from a tiger or brown bear going according to body length. But, I feel certain that the brown bear would prove to be the bigger and stronger of the two. 
 
You claim that a tiger is just barely below the brown bear in strength. Mr.Animalia claims that the tiger is stronger. You are both wrong. 
 
If you would prefer to match your biggest tiger, the Siberian against my biggest brown bear, the Kodiak, we can play that game too.

Toby, i never stated the tiger was barely below the brown bear (i always talked of the grizzly) in strength, but instead equal. 
 
And, i assure you, i`m not wrong on this matter. You obviously do not understand what constitutes strength, or jumping ability, especially with your statement that tigers have more elastic muscles, which is completely false. Muscles are the same in any animal. 
 

Also, Toby, you are completely wrong concerning all those weights of the bears. 
 
Get the weights from actual published documents from real measurements, not just some website. 
 
And, a 350 lb tiger is smaller than normal. They average up to 420 lbs, and some populations, like the chitwan tigers, averaged 235 kg.  
 
Give a fair comparison. But, of course a bear which is much larger will win in a fight. That is why my comparison revolved mostly around grizzly bears, which are no larger. Because, why compare a specimen which is MUCH larger?...how fair is that? 
 

This is not about the average weight of tigers in some particular area. Read my blogs. It is the average weight of the males of each species...averaged out for a weight of the average tiger. This shows that the average brown bears are nearly double the weight of the average tiger. 
 
IF you do not like that face-off, get me a weight for each animal at the same body length. That would be a fair fight. 
 
Or ( choice #3 ) pit your Siberian against my Kodiak.  
 
WHat you seem to want is a fight between a big tiger and a small bear.

I found online a Siberian tiger, 13 feet long that weighs 900 pounds. 3 feet of that is tail. So, a tiger aprox. 10 feet body length weighs 900 pounds.  
 
I found where a Kodiak bear, 10 feet long, weighs from 1400 to 1500 pounds.  
 
There is a 500 to 600 pound difference in a tiger and a brown bear of the same body length. This is proof positive that the bear is by far the heavier and stronger of the two. No big cat can compete with Ursus arctos.  
 
 
 

Toby, there was no siberian of 900 lbs, and 13 feet. That was just an estimate. Even the largest siberian, on record, did not reach such measurements. 
 
And yes, kodiak bears, being larger, on average, grow to greater sizes. And, 10 ft is FAR too large a body size for tigers or bears. even 7 ft is too large a body size for a siberian tiger.

Also, Toby, i never said this was about the average weights of tigers in one specific area. Indeed, an average of all the populations (all the populations of bengals, i mean) is about 420 lbs. Siberians average about the same.

Regardless that these might be rough estimates, a tiger and a brown bear of equal body length, the bear is going to be MUCH bigger and stronger. This is the only fair way to compare. It shows the physical difference. That is why, when you compare a tiger and a brown bear of equal weight, the tiger is much longer. You need an over-sized tiger to equal an undersized brown bear.  
 
So, how much would a tiger weigh with a 7 foot body length? A brown bear with a 7 foot body length?

Toby, length does not indicate weight. It could be a comparatively long specimen, of small size, or there could be a short specimen, of large size (i.e. fat). The same with bears. 
 
But, you are comparing a bear which is quite nearly the biggest sub-species of brown bears, even though the original matchup was between a bengal-siberian against a grizzly bear, which averages from 420 - 575 lbs, as i`ve just recently came upon some new records (no estimates).  
 

I know that length does not indicate weight. Pay attention. When both animals are compared at the same body length, the more powerful species will be heavier and bigger. They can be measured from nose to rear, excluding the tail, since both animals have a short powerful neck.

Toby, length is not an indication of power, and of course, actual 'power' is different than strength. You also cannot say which animal will be heavier, at the same length, for the reasons i gave before. It applies to both animals.  
 
But, here is a comparison; 
 
Grizzly, size of specimens, at certain ages; 
 
http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk45/brentlion_2008/brentonlion/meanbodymeasurementsofgrizzlies-1.jpg 
 
Weight of grizzlyes, at certain ages; 
 
http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk45/brentlion_2008/brentonlion/weightofmaleandfemalegrizzlies.jpg 
 
Weight and measurements of a few siberian tigers; 
 
http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk45/brentlion_2008/brentonlion/weightoftigers-1-1.jpg 
 
Male tiger number 9, at 189 kg, had a body length of 199 cm, his age being between 6.5-7.5 years. 
 
A grizzly bear, at the age of about 7 years, averaged 189.4 kg (a total of 7 males weighed) with an average body length of 188.5 cm, over curves, and 159.7 cm, between pegs. So, over curves, the tiger was about 10 cm longer, but equal in weight. 
 
So, the average bear, lb for lb, is usually shorter in body, but equal in weight.

Bovine droppings! You are trying to weasel out. Take a young mature healthy normal male tiger, and a young mature healthy normal male brown bear, both at the same body length. The species which is the more powerful will be thicker built and heavier. You will recognize the stronger one as being the bear.

As I said before, you go by weight, you give an unfair advantage to the weaker animal. That is the whole reason for going according to body length. YES, the bear will be heavier. That is the whole point. The bear has more musacle mass.

And stop using metric. I am old school. There was no metric when I went to school.

Your message proved my point. To have the brown bear and tiger at equal weight, the tiger must be longer. That means weaker. The bear has a thicker heavier frame because he has more muscle mass than a tiger of equal body length.

Toby, what`s the problem?...you asked my opinion, and i showed you some records that might perhaps shed some light on this. The animals were basically the same age, and of near equal weights. And, i`ve found little difference between siberians-bengals and grizzly bears at equal length. 
 
And, i did not give an unfair advantage to the weaker animal....as indeed, they are as equal in strength as they are in weight. And, you are also stating something which is not proven. The bear does not have more muscle mass. In fact, no mammal yet studied has a higher percentage of muscle mass, as compared with the cats. Indeed, in one record (in actual study, and not estimates) indicated the lion had the highest recorded muscle mass, among mammals. 
 
Can you prove the bear has more muscle? 
 
And, you stated that i stop talking in metric. Even a kid can understand the words i used. If you don`t know what a word means, look it up. And, i also did not weasel out, as i answered your question.

Toby, the tiger was only 10 cm longer. Their are records of shorter tigers, of equal weight. So, what`s your point? 
 
My post does not prove your point, and a length advantage of 10 cm is not significant, and of course, that does not indicate weakness, either. Strength is based upon muscle mass, cross section of muscle, and the percentage of muscle fibers actually used in any given movement. That holds true regardless of the species or animal.  
 
A chimpanzee, for example, though smaller and of less muscle mass than the average human, is still 2 to 4 times as strong. This is due to his greater cross section of muscle, and indeed, i can produce the study to prove it. 
 
Likewise, the average muscle mass of a man is greater than that of a gorilla, yet, the gorilla is MUCH stronger....and again, this is due to the fact the cross section of muscle of these animals is much greater, and they use a greater percentage of muscle fibers in any given movement. Likewise, a greater proportion of their body mass is located in the upper bodies of these animals, denoting even more strength.

Your so-called recordss and studies are total crap! Now I know that you cannot be trusted to deliver real evidence unless it is in favor of the tiger. This is Kindergarden easy. Look at a tiger ( ever try that? ). When the tiger is facing you, he looks flat at the sides. No bulk. When a brown bear faces you, you see lots of bear on either side. Bulk! If you talk a picture or model of a tiger and that of a bear at equal body length, you clearly see a much bigger bear. 
 
So...Let me ask you this. If you can tell me how tall a tiger can be, standing upright on two feet, from the head down. ( try not to lie ).

This is what I found. A Siberian tiger can be up to 11 feet long and weigh 660 pounds. Considering than aprox 3 feet of this is tail, we have a tiger of aprox 8 feet in body length. 
 
A brown bear with a body length of 8 feet and 4 inches weighs from 1100 to 1500 pounds. 
 
 
 
Hmmmm. Why do I come up with bigger numbers? And these anyone can look up. 
 
Oh. I do not want to hear you crying wrong bear! wrong bear! When you "tiger people" started tossing in the Bengal, then this contest became Panthera tigris vs Ursus arctos.  
 
There is a 440 pound to 840 pound difference between the tiger and the brown bear. But, since this bear is 4 inches longer, I'll guestimate perhaps the bear is only 400 to 800 ponds heavier ( smile ).

Toby, i never even showed records in favor of the tiger...so what are you talking about? 
 
And yes, a bear is wider than the tiger, but, shorter in body, both vertically, and along the length of the spine. So again, your point is a rather false one. 
 
The bear would be no heavier, at equal lengths. And, why would i lie?....all the info i`ve presented thus far, has been scientifically documented. And besides, lying proves nothing. The height of the tiger, on average, would be about 7 ft, perhaps a little more.

Are you playing stupid, or is it real? You said a bear is wider than the tiger but shorter in body length. GEEZSUS KRYST! This is my point!!! Do NOT go with a bear that is shorter in body length. 
 
Do you NOT understand equal length? A tiger with a 6 foot body length would be much lighter than a brown bear with a 6 foot body length. I am not talking ounces here. You said "the bear would be no heavier, at equal lengths". Does this mean that you believe that thew tiger at equal length of the bear is also of equal weight?

Toby, i was basing my statements off the average size of these animals, and indeed, on 'average', the grizzly would be shorter in body. A grizzly bear which is of equal length, may be slightly heavier, or it may not be. But, the difference would be very slight...probably by 5-10 lbs. 
 
And, no, a tiger with a 6ft body length would not be much lighter than a bear of the same length....the difference in weight may be as little as 5 lbs, or there may be no difference at all, the difference in length being but very slight, anyway. 
 
I believe that a tiger and bear of equal length would be similar in weight, possibly equal. In some cases, and indeed, i do have the records, a shorter tiger was heavier than a bear of the same length. So, i think you would find the difference in the weight of these animals, at equal length, to be relatively non-existant, given they are of average size.

Ursus arctos horribilis can stand 8 feet tall. In the coastal regions, he is from 500 to 900 pounds. In Katmai National Park and the Alaska Peninsula, a grizzly may reach 1000+ pounds. A brown bear and a tiger of equal body length or equal standing height ( bipedal ) the bear is MUCH heavier.

I am very disappointed in you Damon. You are in deniel of the truth. I'm not sure if you are just lying to me or also to yourself.

Toby, bears can and do indeed get big. But, this has VERY little to do with their length, as there could be a shorter bear of greater weight. It is due, mostly, to food intake. Simply put...the more the animal eats, the more weight it gains. 
 
And, we were talking of grizzly bears, not brown bears of katmai. And, you also gave no actual comparison of these specimens of the same height, nor indicated the records you just mentioned was real. Do you have any scientific documents concerning the measurements of those bears of katmai?...i probably do.....but, it`ll take a while to find them.

Damon. I am beginning to understand that I am talking to someone with some book-smarts but no9 co0mmon sense. I KNOW that 2 bears of the same body length can have different weights. THAT is not what we are talking about here. 
 
Inter-species! The AVERAGE tiger of a particular length / an average brown bear of same body length. The bear would be heavier by hundreds of pounds.

Toby, what do you mean i don`t have common sense?..i have the records to prove my point. What do you have?.... 
 
Nothing...you`re just talking outta your ass. And, here is a record of two tigers, the smaller specimen being 200 kg (440 lbs) and 185 cm in body length, over curves (just body length); 
 
http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk45/brentlion_2008/298496ef.jpg 
 
And, to recap, here are the grizzly bear`s measurements; 
 
"A grizzly bear, at the age of about 7 years, averaged 189.4 kg (a total of 7 males weighed) with an average body length of 188.5 cm, over curves" 
 
Notice the bear was longer, but weighed less. But, hold on....i thought the bear would be heavier, at the same length?....and note, those weights are fairly average for both these creatures.

""A grizzly bear, at the age of about 7 years, averaged 189.4 kg (a total of 7 males weighed) with an average body length of 188.5 cm, over curves" 
 
 
 
damon, exactly when were these Bears weighed? This had to be just after coming out of hibernation, when they are at thier lightest. No Grizzly would be that small later in the year, especially not a healthy, mature Grizzly. The average weight of the Grizzly falls between roughly 400 and 900 lbs, with the weight going up the closer they get to hibernation. 
 
On average, a healthy mature Grizzly will weigh more than a healthy mature Siberian Tiger, by about 100 to 200 lbs, if the weight is taken late in the year. 
 
Personally, I don't think there's much argument as to which animal is heavier and stronger, if you go by the average of both animals, at thier best.

The bears were weighed from april through december, and the average weights of all the adult males (65 in total) was 193.3 kg, which happens to be exactly the same measurements given for rhodesia lions, from G.L. Smuts.  
 
And, it is biased to give weights merely during a specific time of the year...indeed, as in this study, the weights of these specimens should be gathered THROUGHOUT the year, for a more reliable figure, as there weights vary through the months, and an average should be given accordingly.

Also, jcol, and Toby, we can further discuss the matter on my forum, here; 
 
wildanimalelite.yuku.com

http://www.walkingwithlions.com/animal_rentals_tiger.htm  
 
Look at the tiger / Look at the grizzly.

Ya there should be no comparison with strength or size between the largest and strongest land carnivore the grizzly bear and the big cats at all. Theres just no way a lion, tiger ect could kill a large and healthy brown bear.

Lion man, the big cats are the most combative animals on the planet (and, this is not a biased statement). There are actual studies done.....and indeed, lions actually seem to employ a certain tactic to fighting, and one which is very effective. Likewise, they have the higher testosterone, as compared with the grizzly bear, and most likely is the more aggressive animal. Group animals usually are. 
 
Lions also have a higher mortality rate, due to fighting. Indeed, packer states that when rival lions fight, one or more lions are likely to die.

There are also records of lions and tigers killing some of these animals in a face to face battle.

The biggest wild tiger on record was 12 feet long and weighed 845 pounds. Considering that a tigers tail is about a third of it's body length, this was an 8 foot tiger in body length. 
 
An average grizzly was measured at 6.5 feet and weighed 793.66 pounds. An extra one and a half feet would certainly give the grizzly more than an extra 42 pounds.

That`s incorrect, Toby. The biggest wild tiger on record (which was a bengal) was 10ft, 7 in. between pegs, and 857 lbs. I know this, because i have the full document in proof of the record. 
 
That other record, of a siberian tiger, remains unconfirmed.

http://animal.discovery.com/fansites/wildkingdom/greatcats/expert_1.html 
 
record Siberian - 845 pounds. 
 
record Bengal - 568 pounds. 
 
http://foxnews.com/story/0,2939,541720,00.html 
 
grizzly 7.5 feet tall / 800 pounds 
 
www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/79147  
 
grizzly 9 feet tall / 1100 pounds 
 
 
 

Toby, that siberian was never confirmed, and i think it may have been an estimate. I`ve known of that record for quite some time, but have never seen any confirmation in the form of a first hand source. But, here is proof of the weight of that 857 lb tiger; 
 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/10502070/USNM395727 
 
The bengal was 10ft, 7 inches in length, and weighed 857 lbs. It was the longest (accurately measured) tiger on record (well, itshared the record with another tiger, as well as being the heaviest on record.

I don't think Lions fight by choice, damon. They fight because they have no choice. If male adult Lions are to survive, they have to take over a pride. They grow too large to be effective hunters, which is not to say they can't hunt, but it's difficult for them. 
 
Taking over a pride also means that it's thier lineage that continues. 
 
As far as fighting goes, none of these predators, Lions, Tigers or Bears, hardly ever "fight" anything other than it's own kind. 
 
And they hardly ever fight aother predator bigger than itself. 
 
Male Lions with a pride drive away younger males in the pride to avoid future conflicts. 
 
As solitary animals, male Tigers try to avoid conflict if at all possible, because any injury can be fatal. Bears usually give way to larger Bears. 
 
As far as tactics are concerned, I just don't think a Lion or a Tiger can survive the straight-foward attack of the Bear. The Grizzly doesn't float like a butterfly or sting like a bee, it hits like a sledgehammer. And keeps on hitting. 
 
Not taking anything away from the big cats, but I just don't see them taking on a Grizzly and winning.

JCOL... Damon is saying that a tiger is equal if not heavier than a grizzly bear of equal body length. I know that this is impossible, but my recources are limited.  
 
Damon...I saw the records of your Bengal. My question is, what is USNM and why are they right and everyone else wrong? 
 
I cannot find the record grizzly. It seems that that fake tale of a 15 foot tall grizzly is EVERYWHERE. But, I did find Clyde. At 10 foot 2 inches tall, he was not the tallest. However, at 2400 pounds, he was the fattest Kodiak known.

You are right jcol. At the same size ( equal body length ) the grizzly would maul the tiger. I sent Damon a video of a grizzly playing with a dumpster like it was a beach ball. He sends me a video of a tiger playing with a 15 pound dummy.

toby ross, 
 
lol 
 
everything hat you say is the other way around, I have a vid of a grizzly killing a gaur, that can weight 3300 lb! I showed you a vid of a cougar scaring away a grizzly, I showed you a video of a tiger scaring away an elephant with 1 roar. and I clearly explained the advantages: 
 
850 lb tiger vs 1000 lb grizzly 
 
speed: tiger 
 
strenght: equal 
 
muscular: tiger 
 
intelligence: equal 
 
agile: tiger 
 
deadly weapons: tiger 
 
better jumper: tiger 
 
experienced fighter: tiger 
 
better hunter: tiger 
 
endurance: bear (the tiger will finish him before he gets tired so...) 
 
weight: bear (tigers take down prey much bigger then a bear so...) 
 
if the bear was smart enough, it would run and hide, IF it was dumb enough to fight it will R.I.P

and a 9 ft tiger (without tail) can weight 900 lb, and a 9 ft (straight up) can weight 1200 lb, there is only 55% difference, and that difference comes from bodyfat and heavy sceleten. the tiger is still alot longer, and more musclular. 
 
a grizzly bear is no match for a full grown siberian tiger

Toby, that dummy was 60 lbs. And, i`ve already shown that video of the grizzly bear, like a day before you did...which shows you do not fully read my posts. Likewise, the grizzly did not 'throw' the dumpster around like it was a beach ball. It just turned it over a few times, with the strength of about two men. But, of course, that was an awkward movement, the bear being on two legs at the time. 
 
And, in that video of the lion with the dummy...the lion managed to bend the solid metal pole anchoring the dummy....which was a great feat of strength in itself.

Ted, never once did i say the tiger would be equal or HEAVIER at the same length. I said they would be equal or rather similar in mass, but by a slight difference and slightly in favor of the bear. 
 
But, i could find a record of the biggest grizzly.....

On my last post, i mean Toby, and not Ted. Sorry about that.

Damon...here is more proof that you show and tell only that which agrees with your ideas. I'll bet you find tons of material that you refuse to share. 
 
Mr.Animalia claims that a tiger with a body length of 9 feet weighs 900 pounds. A tiger who is 9 feet including tail weighs 1200 pounds. Since you had no response to this, I assume you agree with your friend.

Toby, no, i don`t agree with Mr. animalia, on this. In fact, there is no record in existance, other than some outlandish estimate, of tigers 900 lbs, and 9 ft without a tail.  
 
I`ve already told you this was an impossible size. However, i tend to stay away from the least intelligent of posts, particularly when i already stated such figures were not accurate. 
 
In fact, there is a lot of points mr. animalia put up, that i do not agree with.

One site you had sent to me showed where ( you claim ) 2 tigers were weighed and measured. Actually, I did not even see the word tiger on that "torn piece of paper". It claimed that the tiger, of equal body length of a grizzly, was heavier than a grizzly. First of all, anyone could have typed this. Also, they did not have a scale to weigh a tiger over 500 pounds? Not very professional. 
 
And yes, you have claimed that a tiger of equal body length is as strong or stronger than a grizzly as well as heavier or as heavy as a grizzly of equal body lengh. 
 
Why do you tell jcol that you never made these claims?

Toby, that wasn`t a site...it was an image, from Dr. Melvin sunquist (i have his email, if you`d like to see it) who is probably the most respected source, concerning tigers. 
 
At that time, the only scale he had (it does cost a lot of money) had a capacity of 500 lbs. One tiger, of 200 kg, had a body length of 185 cm, over curves, as i showed you. And no, anyone did not type it. But, you can ask sunquist yourself, here is his email; 
 
sunquist@ufl.edu 
 
You can verify his email, here; 
 
http://www.wec.ufl.edu/faculty/sunquistm/ 
 
And, i said the average tigers (never said anything about length) was just as strong as the average grizzly. Never once did i say they were stronger. So no, i did not make that claim.

Various populations of grizzly bears vary in size a greatr deal. Therefore you cannot get a realistic "average". Various tiger subspecies vary greatly, as do various subspecies of brown bear. 
 
So, to see clearly which species is the biggest / strongest built, we should look at them on an equal scale. That would be Panthera tigris ( any subspecies ) of equal body length with Ursus arctos ( any subspecies ). The stronger animal will likely be the one who is the thickest, broadest, and heaviest of the two.

When you say "average tiger", are you speaking of average tiger or average Siberian or average Siberian/Bengal? Among the grizzly bears, there is a population around the Yukon area that are rather small bears. Your tigers that you are comparing to the grizzlys are bigger than the grizzlys.  
 
Let's compare them according to body length or bipedal height to get a good approximate average weight difference. 
 

http://www.bowhunting.net/bearhunting.net/bear2.html

Toby, when i say average tiger, i am talking of bengals and siberians, the ones more closely similar in weight to brown bears. 
 
Also, yukon bears actually average 190 - 222 kg; 
 
http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk45/brentlion_2008/brentonlion/grizzlyaverageweight.jpg 
 
 
The males, i mean. Those other documents of lower weights, were likely their weights shortly after emergence from their denning sites, or at a point where grizzlies lose mass.

I believe that the tiger has many advantages. Speed. Sharper longer teeth. Sharper claws ( about the same length ). Agility. Quickness. Ability to "hook" onto it's adversary. The tiger's incredible leaping ability. 
 
When I said that the brown bear would win 10 out of 10 fights, I was exaggerating, as I was TOTALLY outnumbered on this site. 
 
BUT...the fact remains that I believe with all my heart that the brown bear has weight and strength on his side, which I feel are two really BIG advantages.  
 
This is why I say that they should be matched at body length. I feel that this is the most "fair" way to go.  
 
I have more on myspace at: 
 
Toby Ross / Og-Lee

Years ago ( I am 61 ) I saw a book that had animals listed according to intelligence. I clearly remember that the bear was placed above the dog, wolf, lion, and tiger. But, I cannot find anything online with a list of carnivore intelligence.  
 
Not that a bright idea is going to help either animal. Just interested.

I went to that site. It looks all very scientific and professional. Unfortunately, it was all Greek to me. I left school in 1966. The U.S.A. didn't start using matric until the mid 70's.  
 
Sometimes, I go to a metric conversion table. Otherwise, it is meaningless to me.

Heres a world record grizzly 
 
 
 
http://mainehuntingtoday.com/bbb/2007/01/29/new-world-record-brown-bear/ 
 
 
 
 
 
http://images.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http://www.southeasternoutdoors.com/outdoors/urban-legends/images/killer-grizzly-bear-2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.southeasternoutdoors.com/outdoors/urban-legends/killer-grizzly-bear.html&usg=__94TPAQbWqo3g4H6Zs67PoTGEe6o=&h=579&w=400&sz=93&hl=en&start=2&um=1&tbnid=6cvFPUYuf_EUKM:&tbnh=134&tbnw=93&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dworld%2Brecord%2Bgrizzly%2Bbear%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1 
 

Yeah, thanks Lion Man. I have read several articles about that. It's kinda funny. I have been saying for years now, "any 8 year old kid could kill the world's biggest bear with a modern rifle". It takes no skill and no courage to shoot an animal. Just the simple movement of one finger.

The world record lion or tiger wouldnt stand a chance against the world record grizzly, so why argue about the animals being the same size when you know that the brown bear still gets much bigger and much stronger. Duuuu!

You are as right as rain, Lion Man. There is absolutely no doubt that Ursus arctos is the world's apex terrestrial carnivore. Just like T-rex, he doesn't have to be the best hunter. He can take the kill away from any other predator.

Exactly, brown bears do steal food from other predators and does hunt prey when they get a good chance. A long time ago when humans didnt destroy the environment, the brown bears diet was 70% prey/meat and 30% vegitaion. So thanks to people, they had to resort to 40% prey/meat and 60% vegatation.

lion man, that bear wasn`t a world record....it wasn`t even weighed. The second bear wasn`t weighed either, though certainly they both were massive specimens. 
 

Also, the discussion is not which animal gets bigger, but, which, at average weights, would win in a fight either between a lion and a grizzly, or siberian-bengal tiger vs grizzly. 
 
I would put my money on the big cats. 
 
And also, Toby, if you really did not believe the bear would win 9 out of 10 times, why say it? 
 
That is deception. You are giving people an answer different than what you actually believe, to sway there opinion on this matter. 
 
And likewise, the grizzly has no weight advantage (we`re not talking of merely brown bears, but grizzlies). And, i further doubt they are any stronger, at equal weights.  

Damon, I over exaggerated when I said that the grizzly would win 10 out of 10 times. In truth, I believe that the tiger might win as many as 1 out of 20 fights if he can maneuver onto the bear's back and get a grip on the bear's throat. And, here you are again saying it's alright if you toss in a Bengal tiger or a lion. But, we are to stick only to the American grizzly. You do not sound very confident in your big cats.  
 
You claim that your tiger ( any subspecies ) at equal body length, is as heavy and as strong as my brown bear ( any subspecies ). I say that the bear would be much heavier and much stronger.  
 
Since you are so set on this bear being a grizzly, are you admitting that Ursus arctos is the world's apex terrestrial carnivore? 
 
Also, I believe that, at the average weight of these animals, the grizzly is heavier that the average Siberian, Bengal, and lion.

If measured at equal body length, the American grizzly will prove to be the bigger and stronger. If matched at equal weight, the lighter built animal is given an unfair advantage. If matched at equal body length, the more robust species then shows.  
 
An American grizzly, at equal body length with his adversary, will easily overpower a Siberian tiger, a Bengal tiger, an African lion, or a jaguar.  
 
 
 

From what I have witnessed in my life, the more robust is nearly alway the stronger. A grizzly who is 7 feet from nose to rump, will be thicker, heavier, and stronger that a tiger of equal body length. Also, when measure in body length, it does not matter if the bear is just out of hibernation, or fattened up for a long sleep.  
 
This is rather elementary. I can look at a picture of a grizzly and of a tiger and easily see that, at equal body length, the stronger of the two is obvious. The grizzly! 
 
 
 

From reading from a variety of sites ( even wikipedia now acknowledges the Bengal as the biggest tiger ) a tiger with a body length of 6.5 to 7 feet has an average weight of 475 pounds to 490 pounds. A grizzly with equal body length averages from 600 to 700 pounds. The grizzly is obviously the stronger animal.

Toby, wikipedia is not a reliable site, and in fact it can be edited by anyone. The tiger is no larger than the lion. 
 
I have every modern document published upon the subject, after all. 
 
Tigers also do not reach 7 ft in body length. And grizzlies, of course, average less than 6ft in body length. And, i have actual records in proof of this.

I did not say what body length a grizzly averages. And, if no tiger has a body length, from nose to rump, of 7 feet, then these stories of tigers 11 and a half feet long are simply stories? Is it not true that about a third of a tiger's length is tail?  
 
You tell me. How long is the body length, nose to rump, of a Bengal tiger?  
 
I already know that you wish to go into a big ordeal about data data data data. Bovine droppings! Give me a rough average, if your brain can handle that.

I just visited about 8 or 9 sites. Every one of them, which gave a tiger's body length, stated up to 3.3 meters. Not one of these sites went under this as the maximum body length of a tiger.

Toby, those sites were talking about the length of the body including the tail, and even those records are not accurate, as the longest tiger on record, measured accurately between pegs, was 10ft, 7 in. (tail included). 
 
I have every modern document (and many old ones as well) on the subject. If you give me you email, i`ll show you all the records. 
 
my email is brentonjimmy@gmail.com, or @yahoo.com

And, you also asked for a rough average (though i should mntion that tigers have reached a body length of over 7 ft, when measured over curves, though those type of measurements is not accurate) of the body length of the tiger. Well, it is between 6 - 6.5 ft in length, from the tip of the nose, to the tip of the tail. Few have exceeded a length of 7ft, though i believe a very minimal amount has (but i`m too lazy to dig within my records to find them at the moment) indeed exceeded that length, between pegs. 
 
But, few reliable measurements have been published, and many sites only give rough estimates, or well known 'guesstimates' upon the length of these animals. Still more sites merely copy the info from another site.

Thank you. Would I be correct in assuming that a tiger 6 feet to 6.5 feet in body length would weigh roughly about 400 to 500 pounds?

Toby, a tiger of those lengths can be from 400, and, even more rarely, up to 800 lbs. So, you were not quite accurate. Of course, they average 420 lbs. Grizzly bears too, average a similar amount.  
 

toby and lion man 
 
a 6 ft grizzly is 600 lb 
 
a 6 ft tiger is 500 lb 
 
a 7 ft grizzly is 850 lb 
 
a 7 ft tiger is 700 lb 
 
is that a huge difference? now, a bears weight mainly comes from dense bones and fat; NOT MUSCLE (they have muscle but not as much as you think). a tiger/lion is not so heavy, but is has lighter bones and minimum bodyfat. now where you think all there weight comes from? MUSCLE! pure steel muscle! at the same lenght tigers are stonger then bears. 
 
now dont come and cry that a tigers muscles are elastic because they are no more flexible then a bears.Or atleast damon showed you a link with that proof. 
 
besides, why do you even argue that a bear will kill a tiger it's lenght while you know that the tiger is naturaly longer?

bengal tiger or siberian tiger doesn't matter, the tiger will kill the bear every time, its nature, a bear is simply no match for panthera tigres. a lion will also be to much to handle for the poor teddy. HOPEFULLY a grizzly could beat a jaguar.

I realize this is very complicated, but I'll try to make it simple for you, Mr.Animalia. 
 
Some people claim that a lion is bigger than a tiger, because it is taller. They say that the tiger is "built" longer. Actually, the lion and the tiger have the same amount of vertibrate. The lion simply has longer legs.  
 
If the tiger is longer than the grizzly, then you are pitting the bear against a bigger tiger. If the tiger and the grizzly are at the same length, then it is an even fight.  
 
IF one species is heavier and more robust than the other, that is simply because that particular species is the stronger of the two.  
 
It's like if you compare a python with an anaconda. To see which is the heavier snake, they should be compared at equal length.

@toby ross 
 
at the same lenght a tiger is stronger then a bear, I dont feel like xplainig this again. 
 
look, is you compare an alligator vs python (which should be a good fight) the gator should be 14 ft 1000 lb while the python 30 ft 220 lb. 
 
now a 14 ft python is no match for a 14 ft gator, but a 30 ft snake surely is. 
 
My point is: let both animals be there natural lenght and the fight is fair!

You still do not get it. I was not talking about python vs anaconda in a fight. I was speaking of comparing two animals of a different species to see which is the more robust species. To do that, you compare them at equal body length.  
 
As for the apex terrestrial predator, it is indeed the tiger. Panthera tigris is a hunter and a natural born killer.  
 
Ursus arctos is the apex terrestrial carnivore. Although not a true hunter, the omnivorous brown bear is the biggest and strongest land-based carnivore.

From where I am standing, it looks like an average Bengal tiger of 6 to 6.5 feet body length, weighs from 440 to 507 ponds. 
 
An average American grizzly with a body length of from 6 to 7 feet weighs from 350 to 850 pounds.

Mr animalia and damon 
 
It doesnt really matter which animal is longer then the other! Sure, the lion and tiger are longer, but that doesnt mean anything about weight and strength! Ursus arctos is the biggest and strongest land carnivore of today, any zooligest or scientist would know that. Just a couple months ago i was at the toronto zoo, and i asked the tour guides/zooligests which grows bigger and gets stronger on average and overall (i already knew what the answer was) and they ALL said that it is a KNOWN FACT that the brown bear does get bigger and stronger then the lion or tiger on average and overall, and that it would easily win. They looked at me stupid after i asked the question. I did feel stupid since its a known fact! After they said to me, "if you dont believe us, go take a look at the three animals and compare what you see. It was pretty obvious.

Toby, it is indeed fair to compare a tiger to that of a grizzly of slightly less length, as indeed, the tiger is longer on average. 
 
However, the bear is most certainly of a wider form, with the greater measurement of girth, and overall weight is roughly equal to them. And, you also mentioned upper ranges as to the weights of tigers. They weigh from 318 - 516 lbs usually. 
 
grizzly bears 308 - 575 lbs, though on average, they weigh no more than tigers, and indeed siberians and bengals can reach 575 lbs as well.  
 
And, you obviously know little about what determines strength.

Also, lion man, we are only referring to grizzly bears, not other populations of brown bears. And indeed, grizzlies are no larger than lions or tigers, on average. 
 
I also have actual records of the average body mass of all these animals (every modern document published on the subject, in fact) and indeed, there is little, if any difference in the weights of these specimens.

damon, Toby Ross, and yeah even Mr. animalia; 
 
Let's not lose sight of what the original premise is; 
 
Siberian Tiger Vs. Grizzly Bear. 
 
We know that a Siberian Tiger's weight ranges from 400 to 518 lbs. There have been larger specimens, but this is the accepted norm. That would make the average weight around 460lbs. 
 
 
 
The problem lies with the Grizzly, in that in different geographical areas, Grizzlies differ in size. 
 
Now since the premise picked what is arguably the largest species of the Tiger line, (I assume that on average, we can agree the Siberian Tiger is Larger than the Bengal Tiger, and if I'm wrong, I expect somebody will correct me)I think it's only fair that we use a larger, geographical Grizzly. The coastal Grizzlies are larger than inland Grizzlies. 
 
These Grizzlies average between 500-900 lbs. This would put the mean average at about 700 lbs. 
 
So we're talking, on average, a 460 lb Tiger, against a 700 lb Grizzly. 
 
We're not talking about Bengal Tigers, Lions or Brown Bears. Just the AVERAGE Siberian Tiger against a AVERAGE Grizzly Bear. 
 
Length is just not important here. 
 
Weight is. 
 
Remember, the exercise is not about two animals of equal size. 
 
The difference in weight is more than 200 lbs. I don't think the Tiger can overcome that. 
 
Ursus Arctos Horribilis, on average, is just too much for the big cat. 
 
But i expect some will disagree. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

damon,  
 
I was talking about grizzly bears, not kodiak, the toronto zoo only has the inland grizzly specices and thay had a female with one cub in the grizzly encloser. I also saw the lions and the tigers and the polar bears, and the female grizzly was larger than all of them! The cub which looked about 2 years old was also big for his age. The cub was the size of one of the adult bengal tigers they had there. And the tour guides are trusted and dont lie.

lion man, you cannot tell the size of a bear just by looking at them, and of course, they often appear larger than they are, due mainly to their much longer fur, and shorter form. 
 
Also, we are comparing wild specimens, not captive....and indeed, those captive bears may actually get more food than the lions or tigers. But, i`ve also seen a bear, which looked large from afar, and it also appeared larger than one of his cage mates (which was a lion) but, when viewed together, the lion actually looked slightly bigger. 
 
But, i do have reliable records upon the mass of grizzly bears....reliable ones, at that, which indicates they are no larger than lions or tigers.

jcol 
 
You make TONS of sence!! Get an average grizzly angaints an average siberian tiger and the outcome will be the bear killing the tiger. Dont get me wrong though, the tiger is a very impressive big cat and hunter, it is built to hunt and kill. But the grizzly on the other hand is just to big for the tiger to overcome. So what if the bear has lots of fat, thats the way they